$B  31  aei 


I 

'.     ',  '  1  .  '•...'" 


8061' 12  W  fiW 
'A  'N'as 


Inter-Collegiate 
Debate  1913-1914 

Baker  University 


THE  QUESTION 

Resolved:  That  through  appropriate  legislation, 
a  minimum  wage  scale  ought  to  be  put  into  operation 
in  the  United  States. 


Price  One  Dollar 


Edited  by 

Geo.  A,  Brown  and  F.  W.  Osterhout 


THE  CONSTRUCTIVE  AND  REBUTTAL 
SPEECHES 

Both  Affirmative  and  Negative 

of 
BAKER  UNIVERSITY 


AFFIRMATIVE  AGAINST  NEBRASKA  WESLEYAN 

A.  R.  Bradley 

Ernest  Reser 

W.  S.  Davison 


NEGATIVE    AGAINST   WASHBURN 

John  Bass 

Geo.  A.  Brown 

F.  W.  Osterhout 


Edited  by 
GEO.  A.  BROWN  and  F.  W.  OSTERHOUT 


Price:  One  Dollar 

— i — 


ALFRED  E.  LEACH,  A.  B. 
Debate  Coach  and  Professor  of  Public  Speaking 


Affirmative  Team: 

Defeated  Nebraska  Wesleyan 


W.  S.  DAVISON 
A.  R.  BRADLEY  ERNEST  RESER 


Negative  Team: 

Won    Unanimous    Decision 
from  Washburn 


GEO.   A.   BROWN 
JOHN   BASS  F.   W.   OSTERHOUT 


282613 


These  speeches  are  fifteen  minutes  in  length,  the  rebuttals  six 
minutes,  and  are  printed  as  they  were  given  against  the  Nebraska 
Wesleyan  and  Washburn  Universities,  two  of  the  strongest  debating 
schools  in  the  Middle  West. 

A.  R.  Bradley,  First  Affirmatiye. 

Honorable  Judges,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  Nations  perish  when 
their  foundations  crumble.  Hence  a  question  of  vital  concern  to  our 
laboring  class  must  necessarily  vitally  concern  our  nation;  for  the 
great  laboring  class  constitutes  the  basis  of  society.  The  wide  spread 
interest  which  this  question  is  arousing  and  the  action  which  has  been 
started  in  several  states  forces  it  upon  the  minds  of  the  thinking 
public  with  a  burning  appeal.  Following  the  example  of  Massachu- 
setts nine  states  have  enrolled  on  their  statute  books  a  minimum 
wage  law.  Hence,  we  are  face  to  face  with  living  progressive  truths, 
no  longer  theories. 

Industrial  disputes  are  about  the  only  form  of  contention  in  which 
the  government  does  not  arbitrarily  compel  adjustment,  but  even 
these  are  coming  more  and  more  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  state 
until  at  present  two-thirds  of  our  states  have  some  form  of  law  con- 
cerning labor  and  its  interests.  Why  this  increasing  interest?  There 
is  a  vast  hord  of  laborers  in  the  United  States  who  are  forced  by 
starvation  wages  to  exist  among  such  sordid  surroundings  that  they 
are  wrecked  in  character  and  in  physique,  the  greatest  assets  of  a 
nation.  In  spite  of  the  fact  that  through  the  long  weary  hours  of  toil 
they  have  produced  wealth  and  luxury  for  their  employers,  these 
miserable  beings  are  doomed  to  suffer  for  the  lack  of  the  things  they 
themselves  have  created. 

Slavery  has  not  been  abolished,  friends,  until  all  such  disgraces 
as  exist  in  our  industrial  world  have  been  eradicated.  All  enlightened 
society  from  Massachusetts  to  Oregon  is  demanding  that  a  remedy 
be  found  for  the  evil  of  the  low  wage.  The  fundamental  principle 
of  labor  legislation  is  the  conservation  of  the  human  resources  of 
our  nation,  hence  the  wage  question,  because  of  what  it  involves,  be- 
comes one  of  our  greatest  national  problems. 

Ladies  and  gentlemen,  in  our  presentation  of  the  minimum  wage 
we  do  not  contend  for  some  visionary  adjustment  which  will  force 
industry  out  of  business  and  establish  labor  in  luxury.  We  contend 
that  upon  no  other  basis  than  that  of  complete  justice  to  both  em- 
ployer and  employee  can  this  question  ever  be  settled,  and  it  is  upon 
such  a  basis  that  we  present  the  minimum  wage.  We  shall  not  argue 
that  a  minimum  wage  shall  be  arbitrarily  fixed  as  a  living  wage,  but 
we  base  our  contention  for  a  minimum  as  such  a  wage  that  will  be  just 
and  fair  to  both  employer  and  worker. 

We  concede  that  starvation  wages  are  not  the  sole  causes  of  pov- 
erty and  wrechedness  of  the  laborer,  but  statistics  and  investigation 

—4— 


prove  beyond  contention  that  a  vast  army  of  workers,  especially  the 
unskilled,  are  forced  to  toil  for  existence  under  conditions  destructive 
to  physical  and  moral  being.  The  negative  must  concede  this  fact, 
and  that  a  society  based  on  such  labor,  whatever  temporary  success 
it  may  attain,  must  come  to  final  degradation  and  ruin. 

Likewise,  Honorable  Judges,  the  proposition  as  stated  does  not 
necessarily  mean  that  a  minimum  wage  apply  to  each  and  all  indus- 
tries. We  admit  that  the  highly  skilled  and  well  organized  trades  may 
not  need  it,  and  therefore  we  shall  contend  at  no  time  that  wages 
as  a  whole  shall  be  tampered  with  or  regulated.  However,  we  do  con- 
tend that  a  vast  number  of  workers  must  be  protected  by  this  means 
against  their  own  ignorance  and  helplessness  as  well  as  against  the 
greed  of  the  employers. 

In  this  class  are  found  the  sweated  laborer,  the  underpaid  factory 
worker,  women  and  children,  and  such  industries  as  are  dependent 
upon  the  mercy  of  employers.  We  do  not  advocate  that  a  laborer 
should  be  paid  more  than  he  earns.  That  would  be  injustice  to  the 
employer.  Our  sole  contention  is  that  if  labor  is  exploited  and  un- 
derpaid, as  we  shall  prove,  then  in  the  name  of  eternal  justice  some 
remedy  must  be  found  and  applied. 

We  realize  that  the  plan,  being  a  human  device,  is  not  perfect, 
therefore  our  argument  is  for  the  principle  involved  and  can  not  be 
disproved  by  an  attack  on  the  minor  details. 

Now,  Honorable  Judges,  having  given  you  our  conception  and 
understanding  of  minimum  wage  I  will  now  prove  to  you  that  the 
minimum  wage  becomes  a  necessity.  That  capital  is  to  a  deplorable 
extent  oppressing  labor  in  our  country  is  an  admitted  fact.  Accord- 
ing to  Professor  Nearing,  one  of  the  world's  greatest  authorities  on 
wage  problems,  one  per  cent  of  our  population  controls  fifty  per  cent 
of  the  wealth  of  our  country  and  further  more  than  fifty-one  per  cent 
of  the  laborers  of  our  country  have  an  annual  income  of  less  than 
$625,  a  sum  estimated  by  some  of  our  authorities  as  being  barely  suf- 
ficient to  maintain  American  standards.  With  these  facts  in  mind 
Ave  see  that  labor  is  receiving  a  pitifully  small  proportion  of  that 
which  it  produces.  It  is  impossible  to  believe  that  one  per  cent  has 
produced  as  much  as  the  other  ninety-nine  per  cent.  The  report 
of  the  Bureau  of  Industrial  Statistics  of  Pennsylvania  shows  that  in 
seven  trades  employing  more  than  60,000  women  the  average  yearly 
wage  is  less  than  $300.  Since  a  large  per  cent  earn  more  than  the 
average  it  follows,  of  necessity,  that  a  great  number  earn  less  than 
this  pitiful  sum.  According  to  a  report  of  a  government  investiga- 
tion in  the  state  of  Connecticut  in  the  cotton  industry  29  per  cent 
earn  less  than  $7,  the  base  fixed  by  this  commission  as  a  living  wage; 
58  per  cent  earn  less  than  that  in  the  silk,  49  per  cent  in  the  metal 
and  49.5  per  cent  in  the  rubber,  or  48.4  per  cent  of  the  combined 
labor  in  these  industries  fall  below  the  standard  of  $7.  It  is  evident, 
therefore,  that  nearly  one-half  receive  less  than  a  living  wage.  Hon- 
orable Judges,  these  figures  were  copied  from  the  pay  rolls  and  em- 

—5— 


bodied  in  this  report  to  the  government.  The  question  arises,  can  the 
industries  afford  to  pay  more?  A  comparison  of  wages  and  the  value 
of  the  products  shows  that  labor  receives  less  than  22  per  cent  of 
the  value  of  the  product  which  it  creates.  Who  would  contend  that 
this  is  a  fair  proportion?  A  startling  fact  is  shown  by  Adams  and 
Sumner  in  their  book,  "Wage  Problems,"  that  wages  in  the  sweated 
industries  have  decreased  in  the  last  decade.  This  statement  has 
actually  been  verified  by  investigations.  Since  this  is  true  it  is 
clearly  seen  that  conditions  demand  legislative  adjustment.  Again, 
quoting  Professor  Nearing,  whose  research  is  extensive  and  whose 
findings  are  without  bias,  one-fourth  of  the  men  and  four-fifths  of 
the  women  of  the  state  of  New  Jersey  receive  less  than  $468  per  year. 
Ladies  and  gentlemen,  I  might  present  a  labyrinth  of  figures  proving 
that  labor  in  this  country  is  underpaid,  but  these  facts,  taken 
from  governmental  investigations  in  several  representative  states, 
proves  beyond  the  shadow  of  a  doubt  that  more  action,  for  the  pro- 
tection of  American  standards  of  living  is  essential.  The  underpaid 
man  becomes  the  physical  and  moral  degenerate.  Note  the  conditions 
in  the  tenements  and  sweat  shops  of  our  cities,  which  are  too  well 
known  to  require  comment.  There  are  20,000  such  tenements  in  New 
York  City  alone  in  which  abound  disease,  degradation  and  vice.  Child- 
hood is  forced  to  contribute  its  uttermost  to  enrich  able  manufac- 
turers. Poverty  is  ugly  and  repellant  everywhere,  but  when  it  assails 
the  cradle  it  assumes  its  most  hideous  form.  To  the  extent  that  chil- 
dren are  robbed  of  their  inherent  right  to  laugh  and  be  free,  to  the 
same  extent  do  you  cripple  and  blight  society.  According  to  Pro- 
fessor Seager  in  his  book,  "The  Bitter  Cry  of  the  Children,"  out  of 
171,732  deaths  of  children  under  five  years  of  age  in  1912,  78,263  were 
due  to  bad  conditions  and  preventable.  Appalling,  and  we  maintain 
that  nothing  has  been  found  so  effective  to  prevent  these  sad 
conditions  as  the  minimum  wage.  It  is  impossible  to  rear  efficient, 
healthy  and  moral  citizens  in  homes  where  the  utmost  wage  of  the 
father  is  insufficient  to  meet  the  needs  of  their  frail  bodies. 

Human  nature  is  selfish,  and  greed  relentless,  and  as  long  as 
it  is  possible  a  certain  class  of  unscrupulous  employers  will  ever 
exploit  labor.  Honorable  Judges,  does  the  fact  that  a  man  must  toil 
justify  an  employer  in  taking  an  unfair  advantage,  to  avail  himself 
of  labor  half  paid?  No,  eternally  no. 

Our  opponents  may  contend  that  as  a  worker  increases  in  ef- 
ficiency in  the  same  rate  will  his  wages  increase.  This  would  be  true 
if  the  pay  check  were  always  in  the  true  proportion  to  the  amount 
and  efficiency  of  the  labor  performed.  But  what  of  the  underpaid 
labor?  How  can  we  expect  the  poor  ignorant  man,  starving  mentally 
and  physically,  wholly  lacking  in  incentive  and  initiative,  to  rise 
above  his  present  low  level?  A  minimum  wage  by  giving  justice  to 
all  is  the  only  remedy  which  does  not  at  the  same  time  destroy  effi- 
ciency. 

It  will  be  argued  that  wages  are  governed  by  the  law  of  supply 
and  demand,  but  this  law.  in  the  words  of  Gide,  the  great  French 


economist,  is  a  blind  law  of  a  nature  that  has  no  regard  for  equality 
or  justice.  It  does  not  take  into  consideration  the  fundamental  prin- 
ciple does  a  laborer  receive  what  he  earns,  but  only  is  the  supply  so 
great  that  the  laborer  will  be  forced  to  accept  whatever  capital  pleases 
to  offer.  Furthermore,  the  law  cannot  operate  under  abnormal  con- 
ditions. Then,  since  the  law  of  supply  is  inefficient  and  unjust,  a 
legal  minimum  based  on  principles  of  justice  is  needed  to  prevent 
great  moral  injury  being  inflicted  on  our  nation.  Is  it  any  wonder 
that  so  much  vice  and  crime  exists,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  not  half 
of  the  women  wage  earners  of  the  United  States  receive  as  much  as 
$6  per  week  for  their  service?  Furthermore,  the  death  roll  of  the 
United  States  is  greater  than  that  of  any  other  nation,  due  in  large 
measure  to  industrial  conditions.  Because  of  the  injury  to  the  in- 
dividual the  state  and  public  welfare  must  suffer  for,  be  it  known, 
the  whole  is  no  greater  than  the  sum  of  its  parts. 

Honorable  Judges,  I  have  proven  to  you  by  government  statistics 
that  labor  in  many  instances  is  underpaid  in  our  country,  whose  funda- 
mental principle  is  equal  rights  to  all  and  special  privilege  to  none. 
I  have  proven  that  conditions  demand  a  remedy,  that  we  may  stay 
the  physical  and  moral  degeneracy  of  our  great  laboring  class,  that 
their  children  may  have  the  opportunity  to  develop  into  normal  men 
and  women,  to  compel  the  freedy,  selfish  employer  to  deal  justly  and 
fairly,  to  enable  the  mother  to  maintain  her  place  in  the  home,  not 
in  the  industrial  world.  A  remedy  I  say  must  be  forthcoming,  and 
what  remedy  shall  we  seek  for,  what  so  just  and  fair  to  all  concerned 
as  the  minimum  wage?  In  fact,  I  maintain  that  a  minimum  wage 
is  necessary  and  essential  to  the  physical  and  political  life  of  the 
nation. 

Legislation  is  the  only  effictive  means  for  bettering  conditions, 
because,  organization  is  impossible.  Those  who  require  the  minimum 
wage  are,  as  a  class,  incapable  of  exercising  the  administrative  ability 
necessary  for  effective  unionism.  Organization  among  the  employers 
is  impossible,  for  the  majority  will  not  organize,  and  those  who  would 
can  not.  Again,  legislation  is  the  only  means,  for  industrial  educa- 
tion is  too  slow  a  process.  Legislation  is  the  only  effective  means 
for  giving  the  people,  who  enter  into  wage  contracts,  equality  before 
the  law,  and  such  a  policy  effectively  operated  by  a  wage  board  con- 
sisting of  a  fair  representation  of  employers,  employees  and  public 
opinion  is  the  only  means  for  making  true,  for  the  first  time,  that 
which  has  long  been  held  to  be  true,  that  is,  the  establishment  of  just 
relations  between  employer  and  employee. 

Now,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  in  conclusion  we  rest  the  issue  upon 
the  fundamental  principles  involved  and  ultimate  effects  upon  society, 
not  upon  the  petty  details.  To  recapitate,  we  would  not  fix  an  arbi- 
trary minimum  based  on  the  cost  of  living,  but  upon  the  capacity 
of  the  worker  and  profits  of  the  industry.  We  contend  merely  for 
a  wage  as  shall  be  just  to  both  capital  and  labor.  We  recommend 
the  adoption  of  a  policy  in  a  cautious  manner,  and  in  those  industries 

n 


where  labor  is  most  clearly  exploited,  and  we  shall  insist  that  the 
negative  recognize  and  meet  the  problem  of  starvation  wages  in  those 
industries. 

Briefly,  having  given  you  our  interpretation  of  a  minimum  wage, 
I  have  asserted  and  proven  that  immediate  adoption  of  the  policy  in 
certain  industries  is  necessary  because  of  conditions  that  exist,  and 
I  have  further  proven  that  legislation  is  the  only  effective  manner 
for  controlling  these  conditions. 


Second  Affirmative,  Ernest  Keser. 

Honorable  Judges,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  The  first  speaker  of 
the  Negative  began  his  speech  with  the  statement  that  a  minimum 
wage  had  never  been  tried  in  any  place  except  in  England;  that  it 
was  sometimes  said  there  was  one  in  Australia  and  in  New  Zealand, 
but  that  it  was  not  so.  After  saying  that  he  spent  almost  his  entire 
time  in  trying  to  show  wherein  the  minimum  wage  had  not  worked 
satisfactorily  in  New  Zealand  and  Australia,  thus  flatly  contradicting 
himself.  The  same  speaker  of  the  Negative  challenged  us  to  show 
that  there  was  a  minimum  wage  in  effect  in  more  than  two  states  in 
the  Union,  namely:  Massachusetts  and  Oregon.  I  have  here  the  Jour- 
nal of  Political  Economy  for  February,  1914,  this  month,  giving  the 
laws  now  in  force  and  operation,  creating  a  minimum  wage  scale  In 
nine  of  the  states  in  the  United  States.  Either  one  of  two  things  is 
true;  our  worthy  opponents  are  either  ignorant  on  the  question  and 
not  up  to  date  on  it,  or  are  seeking  to  dodge  the  issue  that  there  is  a 
minimum  wage  scale  now  operative  in  nine  of  our  states. 

Hon.  Judges,  my  colleague  has  shown  that  the  fixing  of  a  minimum 
by  legislation  is  necessary  to  immediately  remedy  the  condition  of 
underpaid,  unskilled,  exploited  labor. 

The  fundamental  purpose  of  labor  legislation  is,  or  ought  to  be, 
the  conservation  of  the  human  resources  of  the  nation.  The  general 
labor  market  is  quite  capable  of  absorbing  all  the  available  labor  force, 
except  that  of  the  defective  or  superannuated,  at  a  living  wage.  If  in 
every  large  city  thousands  of  persons  must  continue  to  work  hard 
and  get  less  than  a  living,  the  fact  is  an  indictment  against  civilization. 
We  know  there  are  some  objections  to  a  legal  minimum  wage,  but 
starvation  wages,  when  encountered,  are  due  to  exceptional  circum- 
stances which  justify  extraordinary  remedies.  We  pass  inheritance 
tax  laws  and  income  tax  laws,  which  swell  the  national  treasury,  and 
perhaps  aid  the  middle  class  by  slightly  lowering  their  tax.  But  what 
of  the  poor  working  man  who  has  nothing  on  which  to  pay  tax ;  where 
does  he  get  his  share  and  wherein  is  his  benefit?  He  has  none,  but 
is  forced  to  grind  on  as  before.  What  we  need  is  a  measure  which 
will  give  food,  shelter  and  clothing  to  those  who  need,  and  to  those 
who  earn  it,  the  laboring  class,  on  which  rests  the  present  and  future 

—8— 


strength  of  our  nation.  The  proposal  of  a  minimum  wage  makes  for 
itself  a  vast  prima  facie  claim,  in  that  it  promises  to  end  untold  hard- 
ships and  wrongs;  and  it  is  safe  to  say  that  at  present  no  one  is  sure 
enough  that  it  is  not  workable  to  justify  him  in  definitely  rejecting  it. 
If  it  were  our  own  lives  and  comforts  which  were  at  stake,  we  should 
sift  to  the  bottom  any  argument  which  claimed  nothing  could  be  done. 

The  Negative  will  no  doubt  contend  that  a  minimum  wage  will 
not  increase  the  real  wage,  claiming  it  will  raise  the  cost  of  living. 
But  note  this  fact,  Hon.  Judges,  that  the  minimum  wage  as  we  would 
adopt  it  will  materially  affect  only  the  wages  of  the  unskilled  class, 
and  not  the  whole  scope  of  wages,  and  the  tendency  toward  raising 
prices  would  be  slight  indeed.  Later  in  the  debate  I  shall  show  why 
the  minimum  wage  will  not  increase  the  price  of  products,  and  also 
how  increased  efficiency  will  care  for  any  slight  increase  there  may  be. 
Therefore,  the  minimum  wage  will  increase  the  real  wage,  for  an 
additional  dollar  paid  the  unskilled  worker  will  buy  just  as  much  as  a 
dollar  paid  the  more  skilled  individual. 

Plainly  our  opponents  would  still  rely  upon  the  law  of  supply 
and  demand,  but  already  we  have  relied  too  long  upon  the  law  of 
supply  and  demand  to  solve  the  problem  of  underpaid  labor,  and  rely- 
ing upon  that  law,  our  nation  has  allowed  industrial  conditions  to 
grow  worse  and  worse  without  the  expected  adjustment.  In  all  other 
lines  we  have  found  legal  regulation  of  capital  necessary,  and  today, 
being  augmented  by  immigration  and  the  movement  of  labor  to  the 
cities,  the  condition  of  the  oppressed  and  helpless  worker  has  grown 
so  intolerable  that  the  people  are  fast  realizing  the  fact  that  the  time 
is  now  here  when  the  law  must  step  in  and  relieve  the  situation. 
Restriction  of  immigration  and  like  measures  will  no  doubt  assist  in 
this  adjustment,  but  such  measures  alone  cannot  reach  the  needs 
of  a  very  large  part  of  those  now  suffering,  for  there  has  always  been, 
and  will  ever  be,  a  severe  struggle  between  labor  and  capital;  and 
until  the  public,  through  the  law,  step  in  and  say  that  such  things 
shall  no  longer  be,  capital,  because  of  its  superior  power,  will  continue 
to  force  a  great  class  of  unskilled  workers  to  labor  for  just  what  the 
employer  is  willing  to  pay.  It  is  for  this  class  we  advocate  the 
minimum  wage. 

Thus  far,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  I  have  shown  that  a  minimum  wage 
will  increase  the  real  wage,  and  that  we  cannot  longer  depend  upon 
the  law  of  supply  and  demand  to  regulate  the  conditions  of  unskilled 
labor.  Further  considering  the  affirmative  argument,  I  shall  show 
that  the  obvious  objections  to  a  legal  minimum  wage  are  outweighed 
by  its  benefits. 

First  of  all,  it  will  raise  industrial  efficiency.  The  empolyer, 
unable  because  of  economic  law  to  seriously  increase  prices,  will  turn 
to  scientific  management;  when  he  can  no  longer  bargain  for  low 
wages,  he  must  turn  elsewhere  to  increase  his  profits.  Antiquated 
machinery  and  old-time  methods,  now  profitable  only  because  oi 


ruthless  exploitation  of  defenseless  labor,  will  rapidly  be  discarded. 
Trade  unions  strive  for  and  establish  a  minimum  wage.  The  employer 
meets  the  situation  by  installment  of  modern  machinery  and  modern 
methods.  The  employers  of  twelve  states  are  today  meeting  the 
Workingmen's  Compensation  Act  by  substituting  improved  methods 
and  safe-guarded  machinery  for  antique  processes  and  dangerous  ma- 
chinery. When  the  law  prescribes  a  sanitation  regulation  the  same 
is  true.  Efficiency  will  become  the  supreme  law  of  the  industrial 
world,  the  only  hope  of  industrial  preservation. 

In  the  second  place,  the  question  of  unemployment  will  not  be  so 
serious  as  often  predicted.  My  colleague  will  show  that  in  the  five 
sweated  trades  in  which  the  Victorian  law  was  first  applied,  the  wages 
have  gone  up  from  12  to  35  per  cent,  and  yet  the  actual  number  of 
persons  employed  has  increased  greatly  relative  to  the  increase  of 
total  population.  No  doubt  a  minimum  wage  will  thro^v  a  few  aged 
and  decrepit  workers  out  of  employment,  but  is  it  not  better  to  force 
a  defective  out  of  industry  rather  than  let  his  competition  pull  down 
the  wages  of  a  dozen  efficient  men?  Such  incapables  are  properly 
a  state  charge,  and  it  is  better  for  the  public  to  meet  this  responsibility 
than  to  allow  the  far  greater  burden  of  underpayment  to  fall  on  a 
much  larger  class  of  workers  who  are  now  suffering. 

Moreover,  the  prime  causes  of  unemployment  are  directly  traceable 
to  subnormal  wages.  Chronic  malnutrition,  diseases  and  inefficiency 
are  daily  increasingly  augmented  by  starvation  wages.  The  value  of 
the  efficient  worker  will  continue  to  grow.  Labor's  working  life  will 
be  lengthened.  Labor's  productive  capacity  will  be  increased.  The 
human  wreckage  of  industry  will  not  become  a  subject  of  charity 
so  early  in  life.  The  minimum  wage  by  tending  to  give  stability  to 
industry,  will  decrease  unemployment.  The  minimum  wage  removes 
the  most  important  cause  or  unemployment,  the  physical  basis. 

Third,  a  minimum  wage  will  materially  aid  in  a  more  equal  dis- 
tribution of  industrial  wealth.  Hon,  Judges,  note  these  few  statistics: 
By  the  most  conservative  of  stable  authority,  it  is  estimated  that  an 
adult  woman  cannot  live  in  frugal  comfort,  good  health  and  decent 
existence  on  less  than  from  $450  to  $500  per  year.  Yet,  according  to 
Prof.  Boyle,  of  the  wage-earning  women  in  the  United  States,  60  per 
cent  get  less  than  $325,  and  90  per  cent  less  than  $500  per  year.  A 
like  estimate  for  men  is  $600,  based  on  a  family  of  a  wife  and  three 
children.  However,  Prof.  Nearing,  of  the  Pennsylvania  University, 
recognized  authority,  states  that  in  the  section  east  of  the  Rockies 
and  north  of  the  Mason  and  Dixon  line,  one-half  the  adult  males  get 
less  than  $500,  and  three-fourths  get  less  than  $600  per  year.  Likewise 
a  recent  United  States  Government  report  on  over  172,000  men  in  the 
iron  and  steel  industry,  gives  65  per  cent  as  receiving  less  than  $500 
per  year.  By  these  figures  it  is  easy  to  see  that  there  is  undue  op- 
pression of  the  laboring  class. 

—10— 


Again,  it  is  common  knowledge  that  1  per  cent  of  our  population 
owns  one-half  the  wealth  of  the  United  States,  and  only  29  per  cent  of 
the  wealth  is  owned  by  91  per  cent  of  the  population.  By  statement 
of  Dr.  Balch,  there  are  over  1,000,000  families  in  the  United  States  who 
receive  as  a  total  income  less  than  $500  per  year.  Yet,  there  are  over 
1,100  millionaires  in  New  York  City  alone,  that  city  where  half  the 
poverty  is  due  to  low  wages;  where  one-half  the  deaths  of  children 
under  five  years  is  due  to  poverty,  and  where  one  out  of  every  ten 
who  die  in  the  city  are  buried  in  a  pauper's  grave.  I  ask  you,  is  it 
right,  and  is  there  not  an  inequality  in  the  American  standard  of  life 
which  ought  not  to  be? 

Likewise  it  is  common  knowledge  that  many  of  our  incorporated 
industries  are  making  exorbitant  profits.  Just  one  illustration:  The 
United  States  Steel  Corporation,  which  employs  over  200,000  men,  by 
actual  figures  reported  to  the  government,  in  1910  made  a  clean  profit 
on  every  man,  above  all  the  expense  of  the  whole  works,  one  and  one- 
quarter  times  the  amount  paid  that  man.  In  1911  they  employed 
some  fewer  men  and  made  a  considerably  higher  profit  on  each  man. 

The  Negative  would  have  you  believe  we  are  trying  to  base  a 
minimum  wage  upon  what  it  costs  the  laborer  to  live.  But  this  is  not 
our  contention,  Hon.  Judges.  We  have  and  shall  throughout  the 
entire  debate  advocate  a  minimum  wage  based  upon  the  earning  power 
of  the  lesser  skilled  individual.  We  realize  the  fact,  and  maintain 
that  on  the  one  hand,  a  laborer,  man  or  woman,  who  is  physically  and 
mentally  normal,  is  ethically  and  economically  able  to  earn  enough 
to  keep  him  in  reasonable  existence,  and  that  on  the  other  side  of 
the  question,  industry  not  only  owes  to  that  laborer,  but  is  economically 
able  to  pay  him,  out  of  the  profits  produced  by  his  hands,  a  sufficient 
amount  to  keep  him  in  the  frugal  necessities  of  life.  We  further  realize 
that  if  fixed  by  a  board,  representing  the  public,  labor  and  capital, 
such  board  in  establishing  a  minimum  wage  in  a  certain  industry 
would  take  into  consideration  the  needs  of  the  worker,  the  amount 
paid  by  those  establishments  paying  the  better  wages,  and  the  ability 
of  the  particular  industry  to  pay  a  reasonable  wage.  Thus  you  see, 
ladies  and  gentlemen,  that  rather  than  basing  a  minimum  wage  upon 
what  it  costs  the  laborer  to  live,  we  base  it  upon  what' he  earns,  and 
maintain  that  the  normal  laborer  is  able  to  earn  a  living  wage. 

In  the  fourth  and  last  place,  minimum  wage  is  an  effective  check 
to  the  increasing  tide  of  national  degeneracy.  Industries  which  suck 
the  vital  energies  of  their  underpaid  workers  are  parasitic.  The 
parasitic  industry  is  a  social  menace  and  should  be  suppressed.  The 
present  death  toll  of  industry — wrecked  and  shortened  lives,  enfeebled 
women  and  children,  and  growing  numbers  of  physical  degenerates, 
is  the  terrible  indictment  against  subnormal  wages.  "It  is  a  reproach 
to  national  enlightenment  and  Christian  civilization."  Says  Sydney 
Webb:  "Every  economist  admits  that  by  raising  the  standard  of  living 
we  increase  the  national  dividend." 

— 11 — 


Substitution  for  squandered  national  resources  is  comparatively 
easy.  There  are  substitutes  for  wood  and  coal,  but  there  are  no 
substitutes  for  men,  women  and  children.  Conservation  of  the  human 
resources  of  the  nation  is  the  crying  need  of  the  hour.  The  minimum 
wage  is  a  preventative  measure.  It  stops  millions  of  workers  from 
falling  below  the  poverty  line.  This  measure  does  not  fix  wages.  It 
fixes  the  level  beneath  which  wages  shall  not  be  paid.  It  protects 
defenseless  labor.  It  simply  proposes  that  industry  shall  not  exist 
at  the  expense  of  the  vital  energies  of  its  workers.  It  fixes  the  rules 
of  a  competitive  game.  Competition  in  wages  has  free  play  above  the 
fixed  level.  But  minimum  wage  demands  that  industry  shall  play 
fair  with  its  workers. 

Thus  far  in  the  debate,  Hon.  Judges,  we  have  established  the  fol- 
lowing facts:  (1)  That  the  fixing  of  a  minimum  wage  by  legislation 
is  necessary  to  immediately  protect  unskilled  labor;  (2)  That  the 
obvious  defects  of  a  legal  minimum  wage  are  vastly  outweighed  by  its 
benefits : 

Because  it  will  increase  industrial  efficiency,  it  will  materially  aid 
in  a  better  distribution  of  industrial  wealth,  and  lastly,  it  will  ef- 
fectively check  national  degeneracy. 


W.  S.  Darison,  Third  Affirmative. 

Honorable  Judges,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  My  opponent  who 
has  just  left  the  floor  has  based  his  argument  on  the  theory  of  this 
question,  I  shall  base  my  arguments  on  facts. 

Now,  my  colleagues  have  already  shown  that  there  is  a  large  class 
of  labor  in  the  country  that  is  underpaid,  that  60  per  cent  of  the  women 
workers  are  receiving  starvation  wages,  that  50  per  cent  of  the  men 
workers  are  not  receiving  a  living  wage,  that  wage  legislation  is  the 
only  adequate  remedy,  that  the  benefits  to  society  will  vastly  outweigh 
its  defects.  The  question  now  remains  will  the  minimum  wage  be 
practical  and  efficient  in  operation? 

I  shall  show,  first,  that  the  difficulties  and  objections  presented 
are  no  greater  than  those  presented  by  other  reform  measures;  second, 
that  the  plan  has  behind  it  the  weight  of  experience  and  the  best  of 
authority;  third,  that  its  enforcement  will  be  possible. 

First,  the  obvious  objections  are  not  insurmountable.  Every  step 
from  slavery  to  citizenship,  from  absolutely  monarchy  to  republic,  has 
been  fought  bitterly  by  the  cry  of  "impractical."  The  arguments 
against  the  minimum  wage  are  not  new,  they  have  followed  it  and  every 
other  reform  measure  from  country  to  country.  Laws  regulating 
hours  of  labor,  child  labor  laws,  workmen's  compensation  laws,  and 
laws  fixing  a  minimum  of  sanitation  have  been  met  by  the  same  argu- 

—12— 


ment  of  impracticability  and  impossibility  as  our  opponents  are  ad- 
vancing here  tonight.  It  was  contended  that  they  violated  the  natural 
laws  and  rights  of  the  individual;  that  they  would  drive  labor  out  of 
employment  and  ruin  industry.  But  it  has  been  shown  that  these 
objections  are  not  insurmountable  for  today  they  stand  as  living 
embodiments  of  the  indominable  genius  of  the  American  people  for 
solving  complicated  problems. 

My  opponents  have  put  much  emphasis  on  the  economic  law  of 
supply  and  demand  as  a  proper  law  to  govern  such  questions.  Time 
after  time  this  law  has  been  disregarded  by  labor  unions  and  corpora- 
tions and  has  been  discarded  by  our  National  and  State  governments 
as  inadequate  and  insufficient.  The  fixing  of  railway  and  freight 
rates  is  plainly  as  much  a  violation  of  the  economic  law  of  supply 
and  demand  as  is  the  minimum  wage. 

The  minimum  wage  is  based  on  the  principle  that  the  worker, 
whether  man,  woman  or  child,  needs  the  protection  of  the  state,  not 
only  against  overwork,  accident,  and  unsanitary  conditions,  but  against 
unchecked  competition  and  unregulated  employment.  Sidney  Webb, 
the  greatest  living  English  Economist,  and  a  professor  in  the  Univer- 
sity of  London,  says  that  the  fixing  of  a  minimum  wagr  is  less  com- 
plicated and  demands  less  technical  knowledge  than  the  fixing  of  a 
minimum  of  sanitation,  which  must  be  done  for  every  factory,  and  that 
it  demands  less  technical  knowledge  than  the  fixing  and  regulating 
of  hours  of  labor.  Then  is  it  not  reasonable"  to  conclude  that  since 
similar  objections  have  been  overcome  by  other  similar  reform  meas- 
ures that  these  too  will  yield  to  the  genius  of  the  American  intellect? 

The  minimum  wage  is  not  a  new  nor  a  radical  inovation  of  leg- 
islation as  our  opponents  would  have  you  believe,  but  it  is  backed  by 
a  generation  of  actual  experience.  In  Australia  it  has  made  a  steady 
growth  in  power  and  influence.  Since  1896  it  has  spread  from  five 
sweated  trades  to  more  than  a  hundred  trades  and  industries.  The 
official  report  of  Victoria  shows  that,  in  the  five  sweated  trades  to 
which  it  was  first  applied,  that  wages  have  increased  from  12  per  cent 
to  35  per  cent.  The  hours  of  labor  have  invariably  been  shortened, 
the  number  of  factories  has  increased  60  per  cent,  and  the  number 
of  workmen  bar?  more  than  doubled.  Furthermore  there  are  fewer 
dependents  in  Victoria  today,  with  the  population  doubled,  than  in 
1896.  Contrast  this,  will  you,  Honorable  Judges,  with  the  conditions 
which  exist  in  the  United  States  where,  in  spite  of  the  great  increase 
in  the  cost  of  living,  the  wages  in  the  sweated  industries  are  less 
than  they  were  twenty  years  ago. 

According  to  the  best  judgment  of  the  people  of  Australia  the 
law  is  a  success,  for  five  successive  times  the  temporary  act  of  1896 
has  been  re-enacted  by  an  overwhelming  majority  in  both  houses. 
Minimum  wage  provisions  have  been  in  existence  in  New  Zealand 
since  1894  where  its  most  outspoken  opponents  admit  that  it  has 
eradicated  the  sweating  evil.  The  English  Government  sent  Earnest 

—13— 


Aves  to  carry  on  a  special  investigation  in  these  countries  and,  in 
view  of  the  facts  presented  in  his  report,  the  Wage  Board  Act  of  1909 
was  created,  establishing  a  minimum  wage  in  certain  industries.  The 
bill  not  introduced  by  radicals  but  was  introduced  and  supported  in 
Parliament  by  Winston  Churchill  of  the  English  Cabinet.  It  was 
backed  by  such  men  as  Balfour  and  Herbert  Gladstone.  It  is  a  signi- 
ficant fact  that  it  has  proven  such  a  success  that  it  has  since  been 
extended  to  the  chain  making  and  the  coal  mining  industries.  Thus 
the  English  Parliament,  the  most  conservative  law  making  body  in 
the  world,  voiced  almost  unanimously  its  approval  of  the  minimum 
wage.  In  the  chain  making  industries  an  increase  in  wages  of  from 
35  per  cent  to  60  per  cent  was  realized  at  the  first  reward  and  in  the 
coal  mining  industry  of  from  20  per  cent  to  30  per  cent  and  in  no  case 
has  the  industry  suffered.  In  view  of  the  imperative  need  for  labor 
legislation  our  Government  sent  Dr.  Victor  Clark  to  carry  on  a 
special  investigation  in  Australia,  and  in  his  report  he  says  that  in  its 
operation  and  results  the  minimum  wage  is  a  success  "beyond  expecta- 
tions" and  draws  the  unquestionable  conclusion  that  it  may  be 
successfully  applied  in  this  country. 

The  argument  by  my  opponent  that  the  minimum  will  become  the 
maximum  is  not  substantiated  by  past  experience.  The  Survey  for 
January  8th  shows  conclusively  that  the  minimum  did  not  become  the 
maximum  in  England.  The  average  wage  of  the  coal  mines  is  13  per 
cent  above  the  required  minimum.  It  did  not  become  the  maximum  in 
in  Australia.  The  average  wage  paid  in  the  clothing  industry  is  42s 
per  week  as  compared  to  prescribed  minimum  of  36s.  The  average 
paid  to  men  is  56s  as  compared  to  a  minimum  of  45s.  An  average 
of  nearly  20  per  cent  above  the  minimum.  Scholefield,  who  is  authority 
on  Political  Economy  in  New  Zealand,  says  that  there  is  scarcely  a 
factory  which  does  not  show  a  large  number  of  workers  with  wages 
above  the  legal  minimum.  This  is  conclusive  evidence  that  the  mini- 
mum does  not  fix  the  maximum,  and  that  wages  still  continue  to  vary 
with  the  individual  capacity  of  the  worker. 

Furthermore,  the  minimum  has  found  favor  with  the  employers 
as  well  as  the  employees,  for  45  per  cent  of  the  wage  boards  now  in 
existence  in  Australia  were  created  at  the  request  of  the  employers. 
In  the  investigation  carried  on  by  Aves  in  Australia  these  questions 
were  sent  to  the  employers,  "Is  legal  adjustment  of  wages  advantageous 
to  employers?"  Eighty-one  per  cent  answered  yes.  "Is  legal  adjust- 
ment advantageous  to  your  trade?"  Seventy -nine  per  cent  answered 
yes.  "Is  legal  adjustment  advantageous  to  your  community?"  Seventy- 
eight  per  cent  answered  yes.  These  facts  shows  that  justice  has 
been  rendered  to  all  classes. 

The  experience  of  trade  unions  in  the  United  States  proves  the 
practicability  and  the  efficiency  of  the  minimum  wage.  The  principle 
of  the  minimum  wage  has  been  partially  practiced  by  hundreds  of 
trade  unions  throughout  the  country.  Their  fundamental  purpose, 
admittedly  good,  is  that  of  securing  an  adequate  wage.  What  we  are 

—14— 


proposing  to  do  is  to  take  the  same  principle  and  put  behind  it  legal 
authority  and  the  moral  support  of  equal  representation  on  wage 
boards,  which  will  insure  justice  to  all  concerned.  In  hundreds  of 
instances  in  the  past  decade  the  wage  question  has  been  taken  out  of 
the  hands  of  the  employer  and  the  individual  and  settled  by  a  com- 
mission or  joint  arbitration  board.  The  minimum  wage  is  fundamental- 
ly an  arbitration  board  and  is  known  by  that  name  in  New  Zealand. 
Since  the  fundamental  principle  of  the  minimum  wage  is  worked  suc- 
cessfully in  the  United  States  by  trade  unions,  commissions,  and 
arbitration  courts,  we  logically  conclude  that  it  will  be  workable  and 
beneficial  when  backed  by  law. 

The  minimum  wage  is  endorsed  by  the  best  of  authority.  The 
National  Progressive  party  has  pledged  to  work  unceasingly  in  state 
and  nation  for  minimum  wage  standards  in  all  industrial  occupations. 
Father  Ryan  of  the  Catholic  Church,  declares  in  unquestionable  lan- 
guage for  the  minimum  wage. 

In  the  first  case  of  its  kind  in  the  United  States  Judge  Cleeton, 
of  the  Oregon  Circuit  Court,  contended  that  if  laws  regulating  hours 
of  labor  for  women  and  children  are  within  the  police  power  of  the 
state  and  therefore  constitutional  that  these  laws  are  complementary 
the  minimum  wage  law  being  necessary  in  many  instances  to  make 
laws  regulating  hours  of  labor  effective. 

Many  of  the  greatest  political  economists  in  the  world  have  allowed 
themselves  to  go  on  record  as  favoring  the  minimum  wage.  Among 
the  most  prominent  are  Winston  Churchill  and  Gladstone  of  England, 
Charles  Gide  of  France,  and  in  our  own  land  the  list  is  almost  endless, 
Seager  of  Columbia,  Jenks  of  Cornell,  Adams  of  Michigan,  Henderson 
of  Chicago,  Ely  and  Commons  of  Wisconsin,  Hadley  of  Yale,  Tausig 
of  Harvard,  Groat  of  Ohio,  Nearing  of  Pennsylvania,  and  Victor  S. 
Clark  of  Washington,  D.  C.  Hence  we  see  that  the  plan  is  supported 
by  the  best  of  authority  among  labor  leaders,  economists,  and  social 
workers. 

Now  my  opponents  have  cited  isolated  cases  where  the  minimum 
wage  provisions  have  been  violated  and  have  contended  that  they  can 
not  be  enforced.  But  we  contend,  Honorable  Judges,  that  the  best 
laws  on  the  statute  books  of  Nebraska  are  not  rigidly  enforced,  they 
are  not  perfect  it  is  true,  but  would  the  gentlemen  advocate  their 
repeal  on  that  occount?  According  to  the  authorities  which  I  have 
quoted,  other  countries  are  making  minimum  wage  provisions  reason- 
ably affective  and  arbitration  boards  in  this  country  succeed  in 
enforcing  their  wage  provisions. 

It  will  be  backed  in  its  enforceemnt  by  all  honest  employers 
to  whose  interest  it  will  be  to  enforce  the  law  on  their  dishonest 
and  disloyal  competitors.  Reports  show  that  in  England  some  of 
the  employers  tried  to  evade  the  law  but  others  brought  them  to 
terms. 

—15— 


It  will  be  passed  in  the  interest  of  the  largest  class  of  people 
in  the  United  States,  the  working  class,  who,  when  represented  on  the 
wage  boards,  will  give  their  unwavering  support.  It  is  a  social 
reform  designed  to  lessen  unnecessary  hardships,  protect  the  public 
health,  and  lessen  the  vice  of  our  great  cities,  hence  it  will  have 
the  loyal  support  of  social  reformers  and  the  general  public,  whose 
life  and  health  is  daily  endangered  by  present  sweat  shop  conditions. 
It  will  have  the  hearty  support  of  the  consumers'  leagues  of  the  land, 
for  the  State,  the  National,  and  the  International  Consumers'  Leagues 
have  pledged  to  aid  in  the  enforcement  of  minimum  wage  laws. 
Hence  a  law  backed  by  so  large  a  majority  of  the  people  will  make 
enforcement  not  only  possible  but  imperative,  because  of  the  weight 
of  public  opinion. 

In  conclusion,  if  our  opponents'  arguments  are  to  stand,  we 
demand  that  they  substantiate  their  contentions  by  answering  these 
questions.  If  it  is  a  matter  of  state  control  to  fix  a  minimum  of 
sanitation  and  to  regulate  the  hours  of  labor,  why  is  it  not  equally 
a  matter  of  state  control  to  fix  a  wage  below  which  employers,  for 
the  good  of  society,  shall  not  be  allowed  to  pay?  If  the  measure 
is  so  undesirable,  why  has  it  been  continually  reenacted  and  extended 
in  Australia?  Why  is  it  that  England,  conservative  England,  has 
adopted  the  minimum  wage  as  the  best  solution  for  subnormal  wages? 
Why  has  the  measure  been  adopted  by  nine  of  our  states  and  by 
hundreds  of  business  firms  throughout  the  United  States?  Why  have 
the  Consumers'  Leagues  of  the  world  rejected  other  plans  and  pledged 
themselves  to  work  for  the  establishment  of  minimum  wage  laws? 

To  sum  up  our  argument,  we  have  established  the  following  facts: 
That  the  minimum  wage  is  the  only  adequate  remedy  for  conditions 
resulting  from  starvation  wages.  That  it  is  practical  and  desirable, 
for  its  benefits  to  society  will  vastly  outweigh  its  obvious  defects. 
That  the  difficulties  of  application  are  no  greater  than  those  of  other 
reform  measures  which  are  now  in  successful  operation.  That  the 
plan  is  backed  by  the  successful  experience  of  England,  Australia 
and  New  Zealand.  That  its  enforcement  will  be  possible,  for  it  will 
be  backed  by  all  honest  employers,  the  laboring  class,  and  the  con- 
sumers. 


A»  K.  Bradley,  Affirmative  Rebuttal. 

Honorable  Judges,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  Throughout  the  debate 
our  oppenents  have  attacked  the  smaller  details  of  the  minimum 
wage  policy.  They  have  demanded  a  definitely  outlined  plan  in  hope 
that  some  minor  point  would  prove  defective  and  through  this  they 
would  be  able  to  attack  the  great  principle  involved.  The  plan,  being 
a  human  device,  is  not  flawless;  however,  the  defective  minor  details 
could  and  would  be  corrected,  after  a  short  time,  in  practice. 

—16— 


Our  opponents  have  made  much  of  the  law  of  supply  and  demand. 
But  what  is  the  law  of  supply  and  demand?  Does  it  mean  that 
because  there  is  a  great  supply  of  labor,  a  worker  must  take  such  a 
wage  as  an  employer  pleases  to  offer?  No  other  interpretation  can 
be  given.  There  is  no  equity  nor  justice  in  this.  Is  the  principle 
that  might  makes  right  the  solution  of  this  problem?  If  my  worthy 
opponents  advocate  this,  likewise  they  would  advocate  that  the  trusts 
of  our  country  should  have  the  power  to  force  the  consumer  to  pay 
such  prices  for  commodities  as  they  shall  be  pleased  to  fix,  likewise 
such  a  policy  would  enable  a  strong  nation  to  wilfully  oppress  the 
weaker  one.  The  law  of  supply  and  demand  is  a  relic  of  the  past 
and  modern  institutions  and  standards  of  progress  demand  the  enact- 
ment of  a  minimum  wage  law. 

Again,  our  opponents  contend  that  the  minimum  wage  will  raise 
the  cost  of  commodities.  However  my  colleage  has  shown  that  a 
large  part  of  this  difference  will  be  made  up  by  the  increase  of 
efficiency  of  the  worker.  This  would  at  least  care  for  part  of  the 
increased  expenditure  without  raising  prices.  In  some  cases  the 
employer  could  pay  without  infringement  on  necessary  profits,  in 
others  the  unskilled  employee  would  be  eliminated.  Then  again, 
according  to  Mr.  Grant,  in  his  book,  "Scientific  Management,"  the  ratio 
of  what  is  accomplished  in  our  industries  to  what  might  be  accom- 
plished is  the  ratio  1:3.  Hence,  by  scientific  management  the  dif- 
ference might  be  cared  for.  Even  granting  that  there  might  be  a 
slight  rise  in  prices  upon  first  adoption,  is  it  not  better  that  working 
people  should  divide  among  the  vast  number  of  consumers  the 
hardships  which  are  now  shouldered  by  the  very  few  of  the  obviously 
underpaid?  Our  nation  does  not  require  the  product  of  any  business 
so  badly  that  human  lives  must  be  sacrificed  rather  than  pay  enough 
that  these  worthless  may  receive  a  reasonable  wage. 

We  agree  with  the  Negative  that  the  minimum  wage  will  throw 
a  few  out  of  employment.  However,  because  of  the  higher  wages 
paid,  the  employer  will  demand  the  most  efficient,  hence  those  thrown 
out  of  employment  will  be  the  industrially  inefficient,  those  lacking 
physically  or  mentally.  This  would  force  the  state  to  solve  the  prob- 
lem of  the  unemployed  and  the  unemployable,  which  must  come  sooner 
or  later.  Economists  are  agreed  that  there  is  enough  labor  for  all 
the  employable,  hence  the  problem  then  is  the  distribution  of  labor. 
England,  likewise  Massachusetts,  have  established  free  employment 
bureaus  that  are  proving  very  successful.  As  to  the  unemployable, 
the  inefficient  and  the  aged,  surely  the  most  disastrous  way  to  care 
for  this  class  is  to  allow  them  to  compete  with  the  able  bodied  work- 
man, thus  forcing  wages  down  to  their  level.  Hence,  a  minimum 
wage  will  cause  this  class  to  stand  out  clearly,  then  such  measures 
may  be  adopted  as  required  to  care  for  them.  Therefore,  the  prob- 
lem of  throwing  workmen  out  of  employment  is  not  serious. 

Concerning  the  minimum  becoming  the  maximum,  I  will  say  that 
in  reply  to  personal  letters,  Holcombe  of  Harvard,  Seager  of  Columbia 

—17— 


and  Mills  of  Vassar  have  all  said  that  they  did  not  believe  that  such 
would  be  the  case.  Why?  Because  it  has  not  proven  so  in  other 
countries.  The  Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics,  August,  1910,  gives 
conclusive  statement  that  in  Australia  and  New  Zealand,  61  per  cent 
receive  more  than  the  prescribed  minimum.  A  selected  committee 
from  the  British  House  of  Commons,  in  a  report  following  a  care- 
ful investigation,  states:  "It  is  a  significant  fact  that  in  the  clothing 
industry  of  Australia  wages  are  17  per  cent  above  the  required  min- 
imum. In  our  country  the  minimum  established  by  trade  unions  has 
not  become  the  maximum,  and  the  two  are  analagous.  The  min- 
imum will  do  for  the  ignorant  unorganized  laborer  what  the  trade 
unions  have  done  for  organized  workmen. 

If  the  minimum  wage  is  a  failure  in  Australia,  why  has  it  endured 
seventeen  years,  constantly  growing  and  extending?  It  was  adopted 
only  temporarily  and  five  different  times  it  has  come  up  for  dis- 
cussion, always  to  be  readopted.  Victor  Clark  says  concerning  Aus- 
tralia, "The  minimum  has  succeeded  beyond  expectations."  Why 
did  England  adopt  the  minimum  wage  after  investigating  its  opera- 
tion in  this  country,  if  all  the  predicted  evils  follow  in  the  wake  of 
minimum  wage  legislation? 

In  summary,  we  have  shown  that  labor,  to  a  great  extent,  is 
underpaid  in  our  country.  The  underpaid  workman  stands  as  a 
perpetual  indictment  of  the  hypocrisy  of  those  who  preach  the 
brotherhood  of  Good  and  the  brotherhood  of  Man.  We  have  shown  that 
the  benefits  of  the  minimum  wage,  such  as  we  have  proposed,  far 
outweigh  the  disadvantages,  that  it  is  practical  in  application,  and 
that  it  is  just  to  all  concerned.  And  finally  it  corrects  and  checks 
those  conditions  which  if  allowed  to  go  unchecked  will  ultimately 
bring  our  nation  to  ruin.  Therefore  we  contend  that  a  minimum 
wage  law  ought  to  be  put  into  operation  in  the  United  States. 


John  Bass,  First  Negative. 

Honorable  Judges,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  Before  I  take  up 
the  discussion  for  the  negative  I  wish  to  call  your  attention  to  the 
argument  set  forth  by  my  worthy  opponent.  His  speech  can  be  di- 
vided into  two  parts,  in  one  portion  he  tried  to  picture  the  deplorable 
conditions  as  he  saw  them.  In  the  other  portion  he  paid  a  tribute 
to  the  minimum  wage  of  Australia.  My  colleagues  in  the  course  of 
their  argument  will  prove  that  the  minimum  wage  in  Australia  has 
been  an  overwhelming  failure,  and  should  under  no  considerations 
be  adopted  in  the  United  States. 

The  negative  admit  that  the  labor  conditions  in  the-  United  States 
are  not  what  they  should  be;  but  we  do  not  admit  that  they  are  as 
deplorable  as  my  worthy  opponent  has  pictured  them.  Honorable 

—18— 


Judges,  are  we  facing  a  crisis;  are  we  plunging  into  an  abyss  of  wreck 
and  ruin  owing  to  a  few  abnormal  conditions  in  our  laboring  sys- 
tem? Experience  proves  that  we  are  not. 

The  Senate  Investigating  Committee  of  the  Sixty-first  Congress 
reports,  that  during  the  last  seven  years  there  has  been  an  increase 
of  eighteen  per  cent  in  the  scale  of  wages  and  an  eight  percentage  de- 
crease in  the  length  of  working  hours  in  forty-one  of  the  leading  in- 
dustries. The  labor  report  of  the  State  of  Conneticut  states,  that  the 
average  wage  of  women,  exclusive  of  minors,  was  over  $9.00  per  week. 
The  committee  of  the  Kansas  legislature  that  investigated  the  lab- 
oring conditions  of  this  state,  reports  that  every  girl  who  was  worth 
$9.00  per  week  is  receiving  $9-00.  The  950  girls  working  in  the 
Emery,  Bird,  Thayer  Dry  Goods  Company  of  Kansas  City,  Mo.,  are  re- 
ceiving an  average  of  $10.00  per  week.  These  facts  go  to  prove, 
Ladies  and  Gentlemen,  that  the  conditions  are  not  as  deplorable  as 
my  worthy  opponent  has  so  eloquently  stated.  The  official  organ  of 
the  American  Federation  of  Labor  says,  "A  great  majority  of  our 
industries  are  paying  more  than  a  living  wage  to  their  employees, 
and  where  low  wages  are  paid  it  is  due  to  exceptional  circum- 
stances." It  is  of  these  exceptional  circumstances  that  I  wish  to 
speak. 

The  Negative  maintain  that  the  cause  for  low  wages,  which  exists 
in  a  few  industries  cannot  be  remedied  by  minimum  wage  legislation. 
My  worthy  opponent  said  if  we  maintain  that  the  minimum  wage 
cannot  remedy  the  conditions  of  low  wages,  we  must  produce  a  better 
remedy.  Honorable  Judges,  it  is  not  necessary  for  the  negative  to 
produce  a  better  remedy.  The  only  thing  we  have  to  do  is  to  prove 
the  fallacies  and  defects  of  a  minimum  wage,  and  that  is  what  we  are 
going  to  do,  beyond  that  we  have  no  prerogative. 

In  considering  the  question  of  wages,  we  must  consider  those 
fundamental  economic  laws  that  underlie  the  whole  theory  of  wages. 
In  the  first  place  wages  constitute  the  price  paid  for  the  service 
of  labor,  and  hence  come  under  the  general  law  of  supply  and  demand. 
This  economic  theory  seems  to  be  ignored  by  the  advocates  of  a 
minimum  wages,  but  the  great  authorities  on  economics  like  Tausig, 
Seager,  Ely  and  Fetters,  support  the  theory,  that  labor  is  controlled 
and  regulated  by  the  laws  of  supply  and  demand  that  are  above 
any  artificial  laws  that  may  be  promulgated  by  the  mind  of  man  in  a 
moment  of  restlessness.  How  can  a  few  men  assembled  in  a  state  or 
national  legislature  establish  laws  to  regulate  a  certain  economic  ele- 
ment, over  which  they  have  no  control?  The  scale  of  wages  will 
increase  when  the  labor  market  is  limited  or  restricted,  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  men  may  legislate  to  the  contrary.  Any 
country  has  a  high  scale  of  wages  when  labor  is  scarce,  but  when  its 
labor  supply  exceeds  the  demand  as  it  does  in  some  of  the  industries 
in  the  United  States,  the  scale  of  wages  will  be  low. 

—19— 


State  regulation  of  wages  is  by  no  means  a  new  thing.  England 
tried  it  and  failed,  because  the  supply  and  demand  of  labor  could 
not  be  regulated  by  acts  of  parliament.  A  certain  school  of  econom- 
ists set  forth  the  reason,  that  because  the  police  power  of  the  state 
can  enforce  laws  regulating  the  length  of  hours  and  unsanitary  condi- 
tions, it  can  likewise  regulate  the  rate  of  wages.  Such  a  hypothesis 
is  wrong  both  in  theory  and  in  practice.  There  are  no  economic  laws 
regulating  length  of  hours  and  unsanitary  conditions  to  interfere 
with  such  legislation,  but  in  the  question  of  wages,  between  employer 
and  employee,  the  economic  laws  plays  a  vital  part  and  defies  legis- 
lation. 

Furthermore  a  minimum  wage  is  not  elastic,  and  cannot  adjust 
itself  to  the  ever  fluctuating  labor  market.  Suppose  during  the  time 
of  a  commercial  depression  a  large  number  of  men  are  thrown  out  of 
employment,  how  could  a  minimum  wage,  established  during  a  period 
of  prosperity,  adjust  itself  to  the  vast  over  supply  of  labor?  The  price 
of  labor  in  such  a  time  would  rapidly  decrease,  but  the  minimum  wage 
being  fixed  by  legislation  would  remain  the  same,  in  spite  of  adverse 
conditions.  Therefore,  because  the  minimum  wage  would  seek  to 
control  labor  which  can  only  be  controlled  by  economic  laws;  and 
that  it  would  not  be  elastic  in  moments  of  depression,  it  is  hailed 
by  most  students  of  economics  as  false  in  theory  and  dangerous  in 
practice. 

Now  let  us  apply  this  economic  law  of  supply  and  demand  to  the 
situation  of  labor  in  some  of  the  lower  industries.  That  there  exists 
in  some  industries  low  wages,  we  admit,  but  at  the  same  time  there' 
exists  in  these  same  industries  an  over  supply  of  unskilled  labor. 
It  is  my  purpose  to  prove  that  these  conditions  attributed  to  low 
wages  are  due  primarily  to  the  influx  of  unskilled  and  ignorant 
labor.  The  oversupply  of  labor  is  due  to  two  causes: 

First:     Foreign  immigration. 

Second:      The   movement  from  the   rural   districts   to   the   cities. 

There  are  coming  annually  to  our  shores  one  and  a  quarter 
million  immigrants,  largely  from  Eastern  and  Southern  Europe,  who 
are  ignorant  of  our  customs  and  conditions.  This  class  of  unskilled 
and  ignorant  immigrants,  because  of  their  ability  to  endure  long 
hours,  and  because  of  their  low  standards  of  life,  have  been  the  chief 
factor  in  bringing  about  the  conditions  that  exist  in  the  textile  and 
sweated  industries.  The  recent  immigrants  have  little  money  when 
they  arrive,  and  to  avoid  starvation  they  are  forced  to  seek  employ- 
ment at  any  cost.  About  75  per  cent  of  the  workers  in  the  sweated 
industries  are  Southern  and  Eastern  Europeans.  This  influx  of  for- 
eign.immigration  has  so  greatly  exceeded  the  demand  that  today  there 
exists  a  severe  competition  among  the  immigrants  themselves,  and 
these  conditions  in  those  industries  have  forced  wages  down  to  a 
very  low  standard. 

—20— 


The  sweated  industries  did  not  exist  prior  to  1885.  That  year 
marks  the  coming  of  the  Italians  and  Poles  to  our  shores.  They  im- 
mediately congregated  in  the  slums  of  our  large  cities;  and  owing 
to  the  severe  competition  among  themselves  for  employment,  they 
have  brought  about  the  conditions  that  exist  in  those  industries. 
The  conditions  in  the  textile  industries  of  New  England  were  very 
favorable,  previous  to  the  coming  of  the  ignorant  and  illiterate  im- 
migrants from  Southern  Europe.  The  American  workers  in  those 
industries  were  receiving  good  pay  and  working  under  favorable 
conditions,  but  the  coming  of  the  Europeans,  with  their  low  standards 
of  living,  so  increased  the  supply  of  labor  that  the  native  Americans 
were  forced  to  leave.  The  foreigner  today  constitutes  80  per  cent 
of  the  population  in  the  industries  where  low  wages  are  paid.  Their 
ever  increasing  numbers  and  low  standards  of  life  are  the  chief 
causes  for  those  conditions,  and  how  is  it  possible  to  pass  a  law 
regulating  low  wages  when  those  wages  are  caused  by  the  nature' 
of  the  individual? 

In  the  second  place  our  over  supply  of  unskilled  labor  is  due  to 
the  exodus  from  the  rural  districts  to  the  cities.  In  1890  the  rural 
population  constituted  72  per  cent  of  the  country's  population;  in 
1910  it  constituted  60  per  cent.  This  decrease  of  the  rural,  and  in- 
crease of  urban  populatk  n  has  had  its  effects  upon  the  labor  market. 
The  cotton  manufacturers  of  the  South  have  lured  the  poor  white 
from  their  mountain  homes  to  settle  in  the  cities.  This  movement 
so  greatly  increased  the  supply  of  labor  in  the  cotton  factories  that 
the  child  labor  question  has  been  the  result.  That  we  have  an  over 
supply  of  unskilled  labor  is  proved  by  experience.  There  were  3,- 
000,000  out  of  employment  in  1907.  Last  December,  two  months  ago, 
the  city  council  of  Chicago  passed  a  resolution  asking  the  state  to 
give  them  aid  for  100,000  idle  men.  Kansas  City  reported  50,000  idle 
men  in  1911.  '  The  inability  to  find  employment  is  gathered  by  the 
department  of  labor  at  Washington  which  investigated  the  Italians  in 
Chicago.  It  reports  that  the  Italian  is  able  to  work  on  an  average 
of  only  four  months  in  the  year  owing  to  the  great  number  of  Italians 
in  that  city.  My  opponent  has  quoted  the  average  yearly  wages  of 
the  employees  in  certain  industries  which  on  the  face  of  it  appears 
low.  But  remember  that  the  amount  he  quoted  is  the  wage  they  re- 
ceived for  working  a  portion  of  the  year.  If  the  worker  was  able  to 
work  52  weeks  in  the  year  his  wage  would  have  been  at  least  four 
times  that  which  my  worthy  opponent  has  quoted. 

This  overcrowded  market  of  unskilled  labor,  caused  by  the  influx 
of  foreign  immigration  and  movement  from  the  rural  districts  into 
the  city  have  been  the  causes  of  low  wages.  These  conditions  con- 
stitute the  exceptional  circumstance  for  the  causes  of  low  wages  in 
some  industries  as  mentioned  by  the  organ  of  the  American  Federation 
of  Labor.  Now  the  question  is  simply  this.  Can  a  minimum  wage  law 
eliminate  these  economic  difficulties,  decrease  the  number  of  unem- 
ployed and  diminish  the  oversupply  of  unskilled  labor?  To  accom- 

—21— 


plish  that  is  the  impossible,  as  mere  legislation  can  not  regulate  nor 
control  economic  laws. 

Now,  Honorable  Judges,  since  minimum  wage  legislation  cannot 
eliminate  the  causes  for  low  wages,  why  is  such  legislation  agitated? 
The  first  place  we  hear  of  modern  minimum  wage  legislation  is  in 
Australia.  It  was  agitated  for  political  purposes.  Australia  today 
is  considered  the  world's  experiment  ground  for  every  form  of  freak 
legislation.  It  has  no  complicated  commercial  and  industrial  problem, 
and  for  that  reason  the  people  of  that  island  spend  their  time  in 
adopting  every  form  of  radical  legislation.  Every  piece  of  social 
legislation  today,  whether  good  or  bad,  had  its  origin  in  Australia. 
The  minimum  wage  was  advocated  by  the  Socialist  parts  of  Australia. 
This  same  party  is  now  trying  to  regulate  the  cost  of  food  products  as 
attempting  to  regulate  the  price  of  a  loaf  of  bread. 

But  what  has  been  the  success  of  the  minimum  wage  in  Australia? 
McDonald,  that  noted  English  expert  upon  this  subject,  says:  "If  a 
minimum  wage  could  have  succeeded  anywhere  it  would  have  been  in 
Australia  where  they  have  tried  various  forms  since  1894.  The 
country  is  small,  its  industries  simple;  its  population  is  but  a  handful 
and  is  not  crowded  into  large  cities;  its  industrial  inspection  is  child's 
play,  and  it  is  protected  by  a  high  protective  tariff.  But  in  spite 
of  these  favorable  conditions,  my  colleague  will  prove  that  it  has 
not  been  successful,  and  experience  in  that  distant  island  would 
not  justify  its  establishment  in  the  United  States.  Mr.  Aves  and 
Clark  were  sent  out  by  the  English  and  American  governments  to 
investigate  the  minimum  wage  law  in  Australia.  After  two  years  of 
investigation  they  made  a  detailed  report  of  their  findings  in  which 
they  warned  their  respective  governments  against  its  adoption.  The 
minimum  wage  was  adopted  by  England  in  1909  during  the  greatest 
strike  in  its  history.  Coming  to  America,  it  was  passed  in  Massachu- 
setts in  1912  during  the  period  of  the  Lawrence  strike.  Both  employer 
and  employee  were  opposed  to  this  law,  but  in  spite  of  their  opposi- 
tion it  was  passed  by  unscrupulous  politicians  and  urged  upon  the 
non-interested  voter.  Mr.  McSweeny,  a  member  of  the  Massachusetts 
Industrial  Board,  said:  "The  so-called  minimum  wage  law  which 
went  into  effect  July  1,  1913,  is  a  monument  to  the  timidity  of  the 
Massachusetts  legislature  which  allowed  itself  to  be  bullied  into 
passing  without  debate,  a  bill  not  for  the  sake  of  humanity,  but  for 
the  fear  that  the  failure  to  pass  it  might  cost  them  votes." 

An  investigation  shows  that  the  best  economic  students  of  our 
day  are  opposed  to  minimum  wage  legislation.  President  Wilson  and 
Dr.  Hadley  of  Yale  are  among  its  opponents.  As  a  whole  both  Ameri- 
can capital  and  labor  are  opposed  to  it.  Both  organized  and  unorgan- 
ized labor  have  repudiated  and  denounced  minimum  wage  legislation. 
Mr.  Gompers,  the  most  influential  labor  leader  in  the  United  States, 
in  voicing  the  sentiment  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  says: 
"We  must  not,  we  cannot  depend  upon  legislative  enactments  to  set 

—22— 


wage  standards."  During  the  agitation  for  minimum  wage  legislation 
in  California  the  working  women  of  that  state  sent  eight  representa- 
tives to  their  legislature  who  bitterly  opposed  the  minimum  wage  law. 
About  a  year  ago  our  legislature  voted  down  the  minimum  wage  law, 
and  when  the  bill  was  under  consideration,  petitions  were  sent  to  the 
legislature  signed  by  thousands  of  Kansas  working  girls  requesting 
the  legislature  to  defeat  the  measure  for  the  sake  of  their  pride  and 
interest.  Since  both  the  employer  and  employee  are  opposed  to  it 
what  reasons  are  there  for  its  adoption  in  the  United  States. 

In  conclusion,  I  have  proved:     First,  that  labor  is  controlled  by 
economic  laws  and  not  by  legislation. 

Second:     Low  wages,  where  they  exist,  are  due  to  the  conditions 
of  labor  market  and  cannot  be  remedied  by  a  minimum  wage  law. 

Third:     That  both  the  employer  and  employee  are  opposed  to  it. 

For  these  reasons  we  maintain  that  a  minimum  wage  should  not 
be  put  into  operation  in  the  United  States. 


George  A.  Brown,  Second  Negatire. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Honorable  Judges,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  In  the 
beginning  I  wish  to  call  your  attention  to  my  opponents  attempted 
argument.  The  gentlemen  have  claimed  that  immorality  is  caused 
by  low  wages.  This  claim  is  absolutely  without  a  foundation,  because 
if  immorality  is  caused  by  low  wages  only  those  would  be  immoral 
that  receive  a  low  wage.  Legislation  can  not  cure  immorality,  it  is  a 
state  of  mind.  I  wonder  if  my  opponents  can  explain  why  immorality 
exists  to  such  a  great  extent  among  the  wealthy. 

My  opponents  have  made  the  assertion  that  the  law  has  eliminated 
strikes  in  Australia.  One  of  the  most  noted  strikes  in  the  history  of 
Australia  was  the  Victorian  railway  strike  in  May,  1903.  In  1908, 
Australia  passed  a  law  which  made  the  employers  subject  to  a  fine 
of  $250  each  for  striking,  and  the  employees  subject  to  a  fine  of  $50 
each.  The  fact  that  there  were  91  strikes  in  Victoria  alone  in  1911 
shows  that  even  this  law  combined  with  minimum  wage  law  has  not 
eliminated  strikes. 

I  also  wish  to  make  it  plain  that  labor  unions  are  opposed  to 
minimum  wage  legislation.  Mr.  Gompers,  President  of  the  American 
Federation  for  Labor,  says :  "We  stand  for  minimum  wage  by  economic 
forces  rather  than  by  legislative  enactments." 

The  gentlemen  have  demanded  the  negative  to  give  a  remedy  for 
the  conditions  of  the  laboring  people.  It  does  not  fall  upon  the  nega- 
tive to  even  suggest  a  remedy.  We  are  not  debating  the  affirmative 
side  of  this  question.  And,  before  this  debate  closes  even  my  opponents 


will  be  convinced  that  a  minimum  wage  scale  should  not  be  put  into 
operation. 

By  way  of  summary,  my  colleague  has  shown  that  capable  work- 
ers are  receiving  a  good  wage,  and  where  low  wages  exist  they  are  due 
to  exceptional  causes.  Causes  that  can  not  be  remedied  by  minimum 
wage  legislation.  He  has  also  shown  that  minimum  wage  legislation  is 
undesirable,  and  that  the  economic  law  of  supply  and  demand  is  the 
correct  method  of  determining  wages.  It  is  my  purpose  to  show  that 
minimum  wage  legislation  is  unsound  in  principle,  and  dangerous  in 
application.  The  third  speaker  will  show  that  minimum  wage  legisla- 
tion has  not  worked  and  can  not  be  made  to  work. 

Authorities  agree  that  minimum  wage  means  a  "living  wage,"  and 
both  affirmative  and  negative  have  agreed  upon  this  interpretation. 
Then,  minimum  wage  is  based  upon  the  cost  of  living  rather  than  upon 
the  worker's  earning  capacity  which  is  obviously  wrong.  Since 
minimum  wage  is  based  upon  the  cost  of  living  it  is  inadequate. 
First,  because  an  individual  minimum  wage  is  impossible,  the  govern- 
ment can  not  assess  the  needs  of  each  individual,  such  a  plan  being 
complicated  and  extremely  expensive.  If  a  moderate  family,  say  a 
man  with  three  children,  is  taken  for  the  basis  of  determining  the 
minimum,  the  wage  becomes  too  large  for  the  man  with  one  child, 
on  the  other  hand  it  is  too  small  for  the  man  with  five  children. 
The  fact  that  an  individual  minimum  wage  is  impossible,  and  a 
moderate  family  taken  from  the  basis  is  inadequate  explodes  the 
theory  of  minimum  wage  legislation  as  well  as  its  application.  And, 
the  economic  law  of  supply  and  demand  remains  the  correct  method 
of  determining  wages. 

Please  note  that  the  nominal  wage  is  that  which  the  worker  re- 
ceives in  dollars,  the  real  wage  is  what  the  worker  can  buy  with  the 
nominal  wage.  My  opponents  have  said  that  the  law  has  increased 
wages  in  Australia,  but  they  failed  to  show  that  minimum  wage  law 
caused  this  increase.  Wages  have  increased  in  other  countries  which 
are  free  from  minimum  wage  law  and  more  in  some  countries  than 
in  Australia  where  the  law  has  been  tried  for  seventeen  years.  Judge 
Heydon  of  Australia  only  names  one  class  of  regulated  industries 
where  wages  have  increased  more  than  in  the  non-regulated  industries. 
Mr.  Aves,  the  English  expert,  says:  "Taking  the  trades  where  any 
appreciable  percentage  of  women  are  employed  those  not  subject  to 
the  law  show  an  increase  of  wages  on  the  average  of  $3.03  per  week; 
while  the  trades  which  are  subject  to  the  law  show  an  increase  of  $2.15 
per  week."  In  this  case  wages  have  increased  over  forty  per  cent 
more  in  those  industries  which  are  not  subject  to  the  law,  than  in 
those  industries  which  are  subject  to  the  law.  These  figures  signify 
that  legislation  can  not  even  raise  the  nominal  wage  above  certain 
economic  conditions.  Dr.  Findlay  says:  "Here  in  Australia  we 
scarcely  hear  of  the  economic  law  of  supply  and  demand  but  the  result 
of  minimum  wage  laws  is  a  step  to  the  position  that  wages  are  de- 
termined chiefly  by  economic  laws."  Statistics  show  that  an  increase 

—24— 


in  wages  has  always  been  followed  by  an  increase  in  the  cost  of 
living.  Mr.  Hobbs,  a  member  of  the  board  that  published  the  New 
Zealand  Year  Book  for  1912,  says:  "That  an  increase  in  the  cost  of 
living  has  been  the  only  result  of  legislation  so  far."  Raising  the 
prices  reduces  sales,  thus  it  lessens  the  number  employed  and  thereby 
adds  to  our  army  of  unemployed.  An  increase  in  the  cost  of  living 
decreases  the  purchasing  power  of  a  dollar  and  thus  reduces  the  real 
wage.  We,  the  negative,  demand  of  the  third  affirmative  speaker  to 
show  that  minimum  wage  legislation  has  or  can  increase  the  real 
wage.  And,  when  the  law  has  failed  to  increase  the  real  wage  it  has 
failed  to  render  the  workers  any  benefit. 

One  of  my  opponents  has  said  that  the  negative  would  probably 
say  that  the  law  would  throw  workers  out  of  employment.  The  gen- 
tleman has  made  a  good  guess  and  it  is  evident  that  he  thought  there 
were  some  reasons  for  such  argument  or  else  he  would  not  have 
made  such  a  statement.  The  law  is  dangerous  for  the  very  reason 
that  it  will  throw  thousands  of  workers  out  of  employment,  and  thereby 
enlarges  upon  the  greatest  labor  problem  before  the  American  people. 
The  Victorian  Commission  for  1903  shows  that  when  the  law  went 
into  operation  a  large  employer  with  a  staff  of  280  workers  dismissed 
from  sixty  to  seventy  hands;  while  another  employer  who  gave  worlt 
to  160  hands  expressed  the  opinion  that  one  adult  male  out  of  every 
eight  in  the  trade  had  lost  his  employment.  A  furniture  trade  in  New 
Zealand  dismissed  thirty-one  employees  on  the  ground  that  they  were 
not  worth  the  minimum  wage.  These  figures  show  that  12  per  cent 
of  the  employees  lost  their  employment.  Prof.  Taussig  of  Harvard, 
says:  "That  probably  the  only  thing  minimum  wage  can  do,  is  to 
divide  labor  into  two  classes,  those  who  are  worth  the  minimum  and 
those  who  are  not."  But,  this  does  not  solve  the  wage  problem.  It 
is  class  legislation  which  is  contrary  to  the  principles  upon  which 
this  nation  was  founded.  Ladies  and  Gentlemen,  I  have  not  only  given 
you  substantial  reason  but  I  have  also  given  you  illustrations  which 
show  that  where  the  law  has  been  put  into  operation  a  large  per  cent 
of  the  employees  lost  their  employment. 

Now,  let  us  get  our  bearings  on  my  opponents  ingenious  contention 
that  minimum  wage  legislation  can  help  sweated  and  inefficient  labor. 
First  of  all  what  is  sweating?  The  best  economic  students  say  that 
it  is  the  product  of  the  evolution  of  modern  industry.  In  other  words 
our  demand  for  unskilled  labor  is  becoming  less.  In  short,  inefficient 
labor  is  that  class  which  can  not  obtain  better  employment.  Further 
sweated  labor  is  largely  home  work  which  is  done  by  women.  If  a 
woman  has  four  or  five  hours  to  work  after  her  housework  is  done, 
shouldn't  it  be  her  privilege?  Minimum  wage  legislation  will  take 
from  sweated,  inefficient  labor,  the  only  source  from  which  they  can 
obtain  a  living.  Because  if  the  minimum  wage  law  is  to  provide  this 
class  with  a  living  the  minimum  will  be  made  higher  than  their 
efficiency  and  instead  of  having  a  fair  wage  they  will  have  no  wage 
at  all.  One  only  needs  to  know  the  conditions  of  labor  in  Manchester, 

—25— 


England,  to  know  the  impossibilities  of  regulating  inefficient  labor. 
Manchester  and  other  English  cities  have  had  municipal  minimum 
wags  laws  for  decades  and  in  Manchester  there  are  over  300,000  fami- 
lies living  in  atics.  This  evidence  is  sufficient  to  show  that  minimum 
wage  law  can  not  render  any  one  self-support  who  was  not  able  f 
earn  it  before. 

The  affirmative  has  claimed  that  minimum  wage  law  will  increase 
the  efficiency  of  labor  by  giving  them  better  food  and  shelter,  as  soon 
as  the  law  is  put  into  operation  the  less  efficient  will  be  thrown  out 
of  employment  and  they  will  have  neither  food  nor  shelter.  The  nega- 
tive holds  that  the  law  will  decrease  the  efficiency  of  labor.  First, 
because  when  we  once  establish  a  law  assuring  a  certain  wage  the 
inefficient  workers  will  have  no  desire  to  become  efficient.  The 
efficient  workers  will  hold  their  employment  because  they  are  able 
to  earn  the  minimum  wage,  if  the  inefficient  workers  are  employed 
they  are  put  on  the  level  with  the  efficient  workers  and  thus  dis- 
courages efficient  labor.  Mr.  Aves,  says:  "I  think  that  the  evidence 
is  conclusive  that  the  conditions  in  New  Zealand  are  tending  so  far 
as  adult  male  workers  are  concerned  and  over  a  wide  field  toward  a 
lower  efficiency."  Mr.  Clark  says:  "It  is  the  unanimous  testimony 
of  the  employers  of  Australia  that  their  men  do  not  work  as  well 
under  minimum  wage  law  as  before."  In  the  last  four  days  the 
negative  has  received  letters  and  official  reports  from  Australia  and 
New  Zealand  which  admit  that  the  minimum  wage  law  has  decreased 
the  efficiency  of  labor  tremendously. 

Honorable  Judges,  in  conclusion,  I  have  shown  by  illustrations, 
argument  and  facts,  that  minimum  wage  legislation  is  unsound  in 
principle  and  dangerous  in  application. 

First:  Because  the  minimum  wage  can  not  be  fixed  to  suit  one 
man's  conditions  without  working  an  injustice  upon  some  other  worker, 
thus  the  law  is  inadequate  and  unjust. 

Because  the  law  can  not  increase  the  real  wage  and  thus  it  fails 
to  render  the  workers  any  benefit. 

Because  minimum  wage  legislation  will  throw  thousands  of  work- 
ers out  of  employment  and  thereby  enlarges  upon  the  greatest  labor 
before  the  American  people. 

Because  it  will  take  from  the  less  efficient  the  only  source  from 
which  they  can  obtain  a  living. 

Because  the  law  can  not  render  self-support  to  anyone  who  was 
not  able  to  obtain  it  before. 

Because  minimum  wage  legislation  will  cause  our  labor  to  become 
more  inefficient  by  causing  the  negligent  and  careless  workers  to 
become  more  worthless,  and  by  discouraging  the  efficient  workers. 

—26— 


Because  minimum  wage  legislation  will  increase  the  cost  of  pro- 
duction, due  to  a  decline  in  the  efficiency  of  labor  which  must  result 
in  an  increase  in  the  cost  of  living  and  thereby  react  upon  labor  and 
make  their  conditions  more  deplorable  than  in  the  start. 

In  view  of  these  facts  the  negative  holds  that  a  minimum  wage 
scale  ought  not  to  be  put  into  operation  by  legislation. 


F.  W.  Osterhout,  Third  Negative. 

Honorable  Judges,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen: — The  gentleman,  who 
has  just  left  the  floor,  spent  nearly  half  of  his  speech  dwelling  upon 
the  fact  that  nine  of  our  states  have  adopted  a  minimum  wage  law. 
But  simply  because  a  few  of  our  states  have  adopted  a  minimum  wage 
law,  it  is  no  proof  that  it  is  a  just  and  desirable  law,  for  on  the  statute 
books  of  our  states  can  be  found  many  laws  which  are  absolutely 
worthless.  For  instance,  Maryland  has  a  law  which  makes  hanging 
the  penalty  for  burning  a  hay  stack.  Will  the  gentleman  of  the  Af- 
firmative say  that  we  should  have  such  a  law  throughout  the  United 
States  simply  because  it  can  be  found  on  the  statute  books  of  one 
of  our  states? 

Attempts  have  been  made  to  regulate  wages  by  law  in  the  past, 
and  they  have  always  failed.  England  passed  an  unsuccessful  maxi- 
mum wage  law  in  her  Statute  of  Laborers  of  1349.  Even  the  minimum 
wage  itself  has  been  tried  in  the  past.  King  Philip  of  Spain  adopted 
a  minimum  wage  for  miners  four  hundred  years  ago.  But  the  law 
soon  fell  into  disuse  because  of  its  impractibility  and  impossibility  of 
enforcement.  The  English  Poor  Law  of  1796,  which  embodied  the 
principles  of  the  minimum  wage,  resulted  in  the  laborers  becoming 
careless,  inefficient  and  improvident.  The  report  of  the  Commission 
of  1834  stated  that  this  law  actually  injured  the  laborers  and  their 
families,  the  very  persons  for  whose  benefit  the  law  was  passed. 

Thus  we  see  that  the  attempts  to  regulate  wages  by  law  in  the 
past  have  had  one  common  result,  namely,  failure. 

And  a  minimum  wage  law  will  fail  in  the  United  States,  first,  be- 
cause it  can  not  be  enforced.  One  of  the  many  ways  in  which  the 
minimum  wage  law  can  and  is  being  evaded  is  that  the  employers 
sell  the  raw  material  to  the  workers  on  credit  and  buy  back  from 
them  the  completed  articles  at  a  stipulated  price.  This  method  of 
evading  the  law  is  common  in  the  boot  and  harness  industries  of 
Australia. 

Another  way  of  evading  the  law,  which  would  be  especially  baffling 
to  eliminate  in  the  United  States,  is  that  the  employers  enter  on  their 
wage  book  a  wage  which  is  above  the  fixed  minimum,  while  in  reality 
they  are  paying  less  than  the  minimum.  Exhaustive  investigations, 
in  Australia,  show  that  this  method  of  evading  the  law  is  especially 

—27— 


common  among  the  smaller  factories.  For  example,  a  number  of  men 
were  receiving  $7.30  per  week  while  their  wage  was  entered  upon 
the  factory  wage  book,  for  the  inspectors  examination,  at  $13.38  per 
week. 

Although  Australia  and  New  Zealand  never  did  have  the  complex 
labor  problems  which  are  found  in  the  United  States,  for  the  total 
population  of  Australia  and  New  Zealand  combined  is  less  than  that 
of  New  York  City  alone  and  is  scattered  over  a  territory  greater  than 
that  of  the  United  States,  yet  these  facts  show  that  even  in  those 
sparcely  populated  countries  the  minimum  wage  law  can  not  be  en- 
forced. The  inspectors  themselves  admit  this  to  be  so.  Inspector 
Bishop,  of  Victoria,  acknowledges  that  the  minimum  wage  legislation 
can  not  be  enforced  there. 

In  the  United  States,  we  are  already  so  overburdened  with  laws 
that  it  is  almost  impossible  for  the  employers  to  obey  the  laws  we 
have,  but  if  we  add  to  these  our  opponents  unjust  minimum  wage  law 
it  will  only  serve  to  tempt  the  unscrupulous  employers  to  evade  it. 
For  think,  Honorable  Judges,  how  preposterous  it  is  to  suppose  that 
such  a  law  will  be  obeyed  in  the  United  States  when  it  compells  the 
employer  to  pay,  say  $9  per  week  for  a  worker  who  is  incapable  or 
earning  more  than  $6. 

We  scarcely  need  ask  why  they  will  evade  such  a  law  in  the  United 
States,  for  when  the  workers'  only  source  of  support  has  been  taken 
away  by  legislation,  or  in  times  of  industrial  stress,  or  panic,  or  when 
the  workers  can  not  get  work,  it  is  perfectly  clear,  Honorable  Judges, 
be  there  a  minimum  wage  law  or  no  minimum  wage  law,  the  workers 
will  obtain  employment  at  whatever  wage  they  can  command,  for  the 
right  to  sell  one's  labor  to  provide  food  for  one's  wife  and  children 
is  supreme,  and  no  law  will  stand  in  its  way  nor  will  any  jury,  with 
a  moral  conscience,  in  any  state,  convict  under  such  circumstances. 

In  the  second  place  a  minimum  wage  law  will  fail  in  the  United 
States  because  it  will  discourage  industry;  first,  by  favoring  foreign 
competition;  second,  by  discouraging  investments  and,  third,  by  dis- 
criminating against  the  small  industries. 

The  Negative  has  already  shown  that  an  increase  in  wages  means 
an  increase  in  prices,  and  an  increase  in  prices  will  favor  foreign 
competition  and  thereby  discourage  home  production.  The  manufactur- 
ers of  New  South  Wales  state  that  the  minimum  wage  laws  have 
compelled  them  to  decrease  their  business  and  that  instead  of  giving 
employment  to  workers  in  Australia  to  make  the  articles  which  they 
need  in  their  business  they  are  in  reality  giving  employment  to  work- 
ers in  Europe  and  in  America. 

But,  Honorable  Judges,  since  we  know  that  the  minimum  wage  has 
ended  in  a  like  result  in  New  Zealand  we  are  doubly  sure  that  a 
minimum  wage  in  the  United  States  will  favor  foreign  competition. 
And,  statistics  for  New  Zealand  show  that  since  the  minimum  wage 

—28— 


law  has  gone  into  operation  the  exports  of  manufactured  articles  have 
decreased  while,  at  the  same  time,  the  imports  of  such  articles  have 
increased. 

Further  a  minimum  wage  law  will  discourage  investments.  The 
Bovril  Company  was  prevented  by  labor  legislation  from  erecting  a 
plant  in  New  South  Wales  which  would  have  meant  the  expenditure 
of  several  million  of  dollars.  And,  the  minimum  wage  will  have  a 
like  result  in  the  United  States.  This  is  a  statement  which  is  proven 
TDy  the  fact  that  one  of  our  large  American  corporations  was  intending 
to  locate  a  steel  plant  in  Australia  which  would  have  meant  the  ex- 
penditure of  two  million  dollars,  but  they  gave  up  the  project  on  ac- 
count of  the  labor  conditions.  They  state  that  the  uncertainty  created 
by  labor  legislation  makes  the  whole  management  and  administration 
of  business  subject  to  the  caprice  of  party  politics  and  absolutely 
deadens  the  spirit  of  investment. 

Again,  the  minimum  wage  will  discriminate  against  those  in- 
dustries in  which  the  margin  of  profit  is  small,  and  in  many  cases 
It  actually  forces  such  industries  out  of  business.  A  few  years  ago  a 
minimum  wage  law  was  put  into  operation  in  the  coal  mining  districts 
of  England.  But  many  of  these  mines  were  already  paying  all  they 
could,  the  margin  of  profit  being  so  small  that  when  the  minimum 
wage  law  raised  the  wages  of  the  employees,  they  were  forced  to  dis- 
continue business,  and  the  miners,  instead  of  being  guaranteed  a 
minimum  wage,  received  no  wage  at  all. 

A  large  brush  factory  left  Australia  on  account  of  the  minimum 
wage  laws.  A  tobacco  firm  moved  its  factory  from  Victoria.  While 
in  this  same  state  no  less  than  forty-seven  of  the  smaller  boot  and  shoe 
factories  were  forced  out  of  business. 

The  Affirmative  has  contended  tonight  that  such  industries  which 
cannot  exist  under  the  minimum  wage  are  parasitic,  and  that  the 
country  would  be  better  off  without  them.  But  Massachusetts  was 
not  so  sure  of  these  industries  being  parasitic,  for,  notice  this,  Hon- 
orable Judges,  when  the  cotton  industries  of  Massachusetts  complained 
that  they  would  be  unable  to  pay  a  higher  wage;  Massachusetts,  even* 
before  her  minimum  wage  had  gone  into  operation,  passed  an  amend- 
ment to  her  minimum  wage  law  giving  the  courts  the  right  to  declare 
the  minimum  wage  inoperative  for  any  industry  which  in  their  opinion 
«ould  not  afford  to  pay  the  minimum  wage. 

These  facts  show  that  a  minimum  wage  in  the  United  States  will 
discourage  industry,  because,  it  will  favor  foreign  competition,  it  will 
discourage  investments,  and  it  will  discriminate  against  the  smaller 
industries. 

Honorable  Judges,  I  have  not  only  givevn  you  sound  reasons  for 
these  statements,  but  I  have  backed  them  up  with  concrete  examples 
taken  from  those  countries  where  the  minimum  wage  is  in  actual 
operation. 

—29— 


In  the  last  place,  I  wish  to  show  you  that  the  gentleman  of  the 
Affirmative  was  mistaken  when  he  said  that  a  minimum  wage  law  in 
the  United  States  would  not  tend  to  become  a  maximum.  Honorable 
Judges,  it  is  nothing  more  than  reasonable  to  expect  that  if  the  em- 
ployers are  compelled  by  law  to  pay  too  much  to  some  of  their  workers 
they  will,  in  self-defense,  in  order  to  keep  working  expenses  within 
reasonable  bounds,  pay  less  to  others  than  they  deserve.  Take  the 
case  of  the  employer  where  he  has  two  men  working  for  him.  One, 
an  inefficient  man  at  six  dollars  per  week;  the  other,  a  capable  man 
at  twenty  dollars  per  week,  and  there  is,  says,  a  twelve  dollar  minimum. 
If  this  employer  is  compelled  by  law  to  pay  twelve  dollars  to  his  in- 
efficient six  dollar  man  we  can  expect  nothing  else  than  that  he  will 
take  part,  if  not  all,  of  this  increased  wage  from  the  wage  of  the 
twenty  dollar  man.  And,  this  would  be  unjust  to  his  twenty  dollai- 
man,  for  such  a  proceeding  would  stifle  his  incentive.  Honorable 
Judges,  we  have  no  reason  to  believe  otherwise  than  that  if  a  minimum 
wage  law  is  put  into  operation  in  the  United  States,  it  will  draw  the 
wages  of  the  efficient  down  towards  the  minimum.  In  short,  the 
minimum  will  tend  to  become  the  maximum.  To  show  that  this  must 
be  the  inevitable  results  of  such  a  law  in  the  United  States,  we  need 
only  turn  to  those  countries  where  the  minimum  wage  is  in  operation 
and  in  nearly  every  case  the  minimum  tends  to  become  the  maximum, 
and  in  numerous  cases,  the  minimum  has  actually  become  the  maxi- 
mum. In  the  coal  mining  districts  of  New  South  Wales  a  minimum 
wage  was  put  into  operation  which  was  somewhat  below  the  general 
averages  of  the  wages.  And  immediately  the  minimum  became  the 
maximum,  and  no  less  than  six  thousand  employes  were  Compelled 
to  accept  a  wage  of  from  eigth  to  nine  per  cent  below  that  which  they 
had  been  receiving  before.  Similar  results  were  experienced  in  the 
timber  industry  of  Australia  where,  again,  several  thousand  employes 
were  compelled  to  accept  a  lower  wage.  In  the  clothing  industry  of 
New  South  Wales  a  minimum  wage  of  four  dollars  and  eighty-seven 
cents  per  week  was  adopted  for  women  and  girls,  and  official  reports 
show  that  there  are  clothing  factories  in  New  South  Wales  where  no 
woman  or  girl  is  receiving  more  than  four  dollars  and  eighty-seven 
cents  per  week,  in  other  words,  the  minimum  became  the  maximum. 

In  conclusion,  Honorable  Judges,  I  have  shown  you  that  the  at- 
tempts to  regulate  wages  by  law  in  the  past  have  failed.  Likewise, 
the  minimum  wage  laws  of  Australia  are  proving  unsuccessful.  For 
the  very  fact  that  the  minimum  wage  laws  of  Australia  have  been 
amended  and  re-amended  time  and  again,  is  proof  in  itself  that  the 
minimum  wage  laws  of  Australia  are  not  satisfactory.  I  have  also 
shown  you  that  the  minimum  wage  will  fail  in  the  United  States;  first, 
because  it  can  not  be  enforced,  for  it  is  an  utter  impossibility  to  enforce 
a  law  in  the  United  States  which  is  not  based  on  justice  and  equity. 
Second,  the  minimum  will  discourage  industry  because  it  will  favor 
foreign  competition;  it  will  discourage  investment,  and  it  will  dis- 
criminate against  the  smaller  industries.  Third,  the  minimum  will 
tend  to  become  the  maximum. 

—30— 


Honorable  Judges,  in  closing,  I  would  have  you  notice  this,  the 
gentlemen  of  the  Affirmative  would  adopt  their  unjust  minimum  wage 
law  throughout  the  United  States;  a  law  which  must  extend  over 
forty-eight  different  states  with  all  the  varying  conditions.  They  would 
adopt  a  plan  which  has  been  tried  in  the  past  and  which  in  every  case 
has,  in  time,  proven  unsuccessful.  Shall  we  adopt  such  a  law  in  the 
United  States  which  fixes  a  certain  wage  on  the  one  hand  and  at  the 
same  time  prescribes  no  fixed  return  of  service  on  the  other?  If  we 
are  to  give  both  the  employer  and  the  employee  an  absolutely  fair 
and  equal  chance,  the  law  will  have  to  prescribe  a  fixed  return  of 
service  for  a  fixed  wage,  and  such  a  plan  is  neither  practical  nor 
possible. 


George  A.  Brown,  Negative  Rebuttal. 

The  third  affirmative  speaker  concluded  the  constructive  argument 
for  the  affirmative  by  urging  that  we  should  adopt  minimum  wage  law 
because  we  have  passed  work-hour  and  sanitary  laws.  These  laws  are 
simple  in  both  their  scope  and  administration  when  compared  with 
minimum  wage  law.  There  is  no  economic  law  governing  the  length 
of  work  days,  but  there  is  the  law  of  supply  and  demand  which  gov- 
erns wages,  and  it  must  be  recognized. 

The  gentleman  said  that  the  minimum  wage  law  had  restricted 
immigration  in  Australia;  it  is  evident  that  he  is  not  aware  of  the 
fact  that  Australia  has  immigration  laws  against  the  Southern  and 
Eastern  Europeans,  if  anything  has  restricted  immigration  in  Aus- 
tralia it  has  been  their  immigration  laws  and  not  their  minimum 
wage  law. 

It  is  rather  humorous  the  way  my  opponent  tried  to  line  all  the 
economists  up  on  his  side.  He  named  Dr.  Hadley,  and  the  gentlemen 
have  also  claimed  that  the  law  will  increase  the  efficiency  of  labor, 
let  us  see  what  Dr.  Hadley  says  about  the  law  increasing  the  effi- 
ciency. He  says,  "That  increased  efficiency  of  work  necessary  re- 
sults from  improvement  in  wages,  seems  a  dangerous  fallacy."  The 
gentlemen  have  repeatedly  named  Sidney  Webb.  Sidney  Webb  is  a 
radical  Socialist  of  the  first  magnitude;  and,  to  prove  my  case  I  only 
need  to  use  Mr.  Webb's  own  quotation  in  which  Mr.  Webb  says: 
"Minimum  wage  law  is  simple  when  compared  with  sanitary  laws." 
Think,  Honorable  Judges,  of  the  absurdity  of  saying  that  a  law  that 
goes  into  a  man's  pocketbook  and  demands  him  to  pay  a  certain  wage 
is  simple  when  comparied  with  a  law  that  merely  requires  certain 
sanitary  conditions.  Why,  a  moment's  reflection  cancels  such  au- 
thority. 

In  my  main  speech  I  demanded  of  the  affirmative  to  show  that 
the  law  could  increase  the  real  wage,  the  main  argument  of  this 
detate  is  closed  and  the  gentlemen  have  not  attempted  to  answer 

—31— 


our  demand.  If  the  gentleman  attempts  to  answer  this  challenge  in 
his  rebuttal  we  hold  that  he  is  afraid  of  his  argument.  No  affirmative 
can  hope  to  win  the  debate  when  they  have  failed  to  show  that  the 
law  will  increase  the  real  wage.  The  official  reports  from  New 
Zealand  show  that  since  the  law  has  been  put  into  operation  wages 
have  increased  19  per  cent,  and  the  cost  of  living  has  increased  22.5 
per  cent.  This  means  that  the  real  wage  is  3.5  per  cent  less  in  New 
Zealand  than  when  the  law  was  put  into  operation.  Mr.  Schofield,  a 
New  Zealand  writer,  says:  "That  an  increase  in  wages  has  always 
been  followed  by  an  increase  in  the  cost  of  products  to  the  consumer 
who  is  generally  the  laboring  man  himself." 

By  way  of  summary  the  negative  has  shown: 

First,  that  the  law  is  not  even  sound  in  theory.  The  third  nega- 
tive speaker  has  shown  beyond  any  controversy  that  the  law  has 
proven  unsatisfactory  in  practice. 

That  minimum  wage  legislation  can  not  restrict  the  900,000 
ignorant  and  inefficient  immigrants  that  come  from  Southern  Europe 
annually,  and  check  the  exodus  to  the  cities. 

That  the  minimum  wage  can  not  be  fixed  to  suit  one  man's  condii 
tions  without  working  an  injustice  upon  some  other  worker,  and 
thus  the  law  is  inadequate  and  unjust. 

The  negative  has  given  abundance  of  evidence  which  shows  that 
the  law  has  not  and  can  not  increase  the  real  wage.  Even  Australia 
authorities  admit  that  in  spite  of  legislation  wages  are  governed  by 
economic  conditions. 

That  the  law  will  cause  labor  to  become  more  inefficient,  by 
causing  the  negligent  and  careless  workers  to  become  more  worth- 
less, and  by  discouraging  efficient  workers,  due  to  the  leveling  of 
wages.  My  colleague  has  shown  that  the  minimum  tends  to  become 
the  maximum.  He  has  given  cases  where  the  minimum  has  actually 
become  the  maximum. 

That  the  law  will  cause  an  increase  in  the  cost  of  production, 
due  to  decline  in  the  efficiency  of  labor,  and  here  the  law  fails  to  in- 
crease the  real  wage. 

That  the  minimum  wage  scale  theory  will  throw  thousands  of 
workers  out  of  employment.  It  has  been  estimated  by  the  Father 
Ryan  that  those  who  will  not  be  able  to  earn  the  minimum  wage 
will  number  8,000,000.  The  official  reports  from  Victoria  show  that 
twelve  per  cent  of  the  employes  lost  their  employment.  This  is 
proof  that  the  law  will  take  from  the  less  efficient  the  only  source 
from  which  they  can  obtain  a  living. 

Lastly,  those  whom  the  law  will  effect  are  opposed  to  it.  For 
example,  the  Chicago  merchants  in  conference,  held  April  1st,  de- 
clared themselves  against  minimum  wage  law.  The  employes,  thor 


very  ones  for  whom  the  law  is  supposed  to  benefit,  have  repudiated 
and  denounced  minimum  wage  legislation. 

In  conclusion,  minimum  wage  legislation  not  only  fails  to  remedy 
the  causes  of  the  conditions  of  the  laboring  people,  but  it  is  not  even 
sound  in  theory,  and  has  proven  unsatisfactory  in  practice.  It  is 
inadequate  and  unjust;  it  can  not  increase  the  real  wage,  and  thus 
fails  to  render  the  workers  any  benefit;  it  makes  the  conditions  of 
the  workers  more  deplorable  than  in  the  start  by  throwing  thousands 
of  them  out  of  employment,  and  by  decreasing  their  efficiency.  Hon. 
Judges,  in  view  of  these  facts  we  ask  you  to  hold  the  affirmative  to 
strict  proof. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY   OF   THE   MINIMUM   WAGE    QUESTION 

Books. 

Ashley,  W.  J.    Adjustment  of  Wages. 
Clark,  Victor  S.     Labor  Movement  in  Australia. 
Cambridge  History.     Vol.  I.,  p.  516. 
Boyle,   James.     Minimum  Wage   and   Syndicalism. 
Le  Rossignol.     State  Socialism  in  New  Zealand. 
Nearing.     Wages  in  the  United  States. 
Ryan,  J.  A.     A  Living  Wage. 

Ryan,   J.   A.     A   Minimum   Wage   and   Minimum   Wage   Boards. 
Carnegie.     Problem  of  Today. 
Webb,  Sydney.     Problems  of  Modern  Industries. 
Adams  and  Sumner.     Labor  Problems. 
Chapin,  R.  C.     The  Standard  of  Living. 
Levasseur.     American  Workman. 

Balch,  W.  M.     Christianity  and  the  Labor  Movement. 
Gnatt.     Work,  Wages  and  Profits. 
Encyclopedia  Britinica.    Vol.  28,  Vol.  16. 
St.  Ledger,  A.    Australian  Socialism. 
Scholefield,  Guy  H.     New  Zealand  in  Evolution. 
Aves,  Ernest.     Reports  of  Labor  Conditions  in  New  Zealand  and 
Australia. 

Clark,  Victor  S.  Labor  Conditions  in  Australia.  U.  S.  Labor 
Bulletin  No.  56. 

Clark,  Victor  S.  Labor  Conditions  in  New  Zealand.  U.  S.  Labor 
Bulletin  No.  49. 

Henderson.     Pay  Day. 

Intercollegiate  Debates.     Vol  3,  pp.  81-184. 

Butler.     Women  and  the  Trades. 

Dawson,  W.  H.     Social  Industry  in  Germany. 

Hayes,  Carlton.     British  Social  Politics. 

Spargo,  John.     The  Bitter  Cry  of  the  Children. 

Hadley,  Dr.,  of  Yale.     Economics,  pp.  361-69. 

—33— 


Taussig,   F.   W.,   of  Harvard.     Principles   of  Economics.     Vol.    1, 
pp.  285-302. 

Ely,  R.  T.,  of  Wisconsin.     Outlines  of  Economics.     (See  Wages.) 
Gant.     Scientific  Management. 


Statistics. 

Pennsylvania.     Annual   Report  of  Industrial   Statistics,   1911. 

Connecticut.  Report  of  Labor  Conditions  of  Wage  Earning 
Women  and  Minors,  1913. 

New  York.  Annual  Report  of  Bureau  of  Labor  Statistics,  Part  2, 
1911. 

Report  of  the  Thirteenth  Census  of  the  United  States.  Comparison 
of  Wages  and  Profits.  Vol.  8,  pp.  518-41,  1910. 

Massachusetts.  Report  of  the  Commission  on  Minimum  Wage 
Boards,  1912. 

Pamphlets. 

Reeley,  M.  K..    Select  Articles  on  Minimum  Wage. 

Study  of  State  and  Federal  Wage  Statistics. 

Report  of  the  Industrial  Commission.     Vol.  15,  1901. 

Women  and  the  Trades. 

U.  S.  Labor  Bulletin.     Vol.  24,  pp.  178-202. 

McSweeney,  E.  F.  Minimum  Wage  and  Other  Economic  Quacker- 
ies. 

McSweeney,  E.  F.  Practicability  and  Desirability  of  Minimum 
Wage. 

Labor  Clarion,  March  28,  1913. 

Senate    Documents,    62nd    Congress,    First    Session. 

Senate  Documents,  Vol.  7,  p.  61.     Congress. 

Senate  Documents,  Vol.  20,  p.  61.     Congress. 

Seager,  W.  R.     Theory  of  Minimum  Wage. 

Mackay,  John  (Wellington).  Handbook  of  Labor  Laws  in  New 
Zealand. 

Canterbury  Employers  Association  Year  Book,   1911-12-13. 

Report  of  the  Chief  Inspector  of  Factories  and  Shops,  Victoria, 
Australia. 

Commons,  John  R.     Proposed  Minimum  Wage  Law  for  Wisconsin. 

Association  for  Labor  Legislation  New  York,  Reports  and  Pamph- 
lets. 

Kelly,  Florence.     Minimum  Wage  Boards. 

McSweeney,  E.  F.     The  Case  Against  the  Minimum  Wage. 

A  National  Peril.     New  Zealand  Employers'  Federation. 

Address,  Scott,  William.  Secretary  Otago  Employers'  Association. 
New  Zealand. 

Annual  Report.     Aukland  Employers'  Association,  1912. 

Annual   Report.     Canterbury   Employers'   Association,    1910. 

—34— 


Annual   Report.     Otago   Employers'  Association,   1911. 

Speech,  Dr.  Pindlay,  Attorney  General  Wellington,  New  Zealand, 
1908. 

Hammond,  H.  B.  Judicial  Interpretation  of  the  Minimum  Wage 
in  Australia. 

Magazines. 

Survey.  Vol.  23,  pp.  577-8;  Vol.  24,  pp.  806-10,  810-20,  759-62; 
Vol.  25,  pp.  789-92,  815-16,  864-65,  772-81,  571;  Vol.  26,  pp.  32-3,  907; 
Vol.  27,  pp.  1623-24,  1663-5;  Vol.  28,  pp.  313,  454-5,  10-11;  Vol.  29,  J>p. 
470,  533,  174,  897,  49,  74-6,  653;  Vol.  30,  pp.  4-5,  9-10,  112,  64,  755-6, 
260-1,  416;  Vol.  31,  pp.  181,  50-1,  106-7,  351,  321,  323,  324,  454;  Rev.  of 
Rev.,  Vol.  19,  pp.  32-54;  Vol.  33,  pp.  40-2;  Vol.  34,  p.  615;  Vol.  45,  pp. 
439-42;  Vol.  46,  pp.  366,  367-8;  Vol.  47,  pp.  216,  349;  Vol.  48,  pp.  216-7, 
375-6. 

Journal  of  Political  Economy.  Vol.  19,  pp.  479-90;  Vol.  20,  pp.  999- 
1010,  973-78,  834-45;  Vol.  21,  pp.  752-61,  630-42;  Vol.  24,  pp.  578-88. 

Political  Science  Quarterly.     Vol.  13,  pp.  413-41;  Vol.  18.  112-140. 

American  Labor  Legislation  Review,  February,  1913. 

Quarterly  Review.    Vol.  210,  pp.  67-85;  Vol.  216,  pp.  554-73. 

Economic  Review.     Vol.  14,  pp.  118-20. 

Engineering  Magazine.  Vol.  35,  pp.  529-36,  661,  909;  Vol.  36,  pp. 
498,  698;  Vol.  39,  pp.  161,  331;  Vol.  43,  pp.  451-53. 

Literary  Digest.     Vol.  46,  pp.  774-5,  621-4;   Vol.  47,  pp.  548,  1067. 

Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics.  Vol.  18,  pp.  140-45;  Vol.  20,  pp. 
497-522;  Vol.  23,  pp.  450-69;  Vol.  24,  pp.  561,  574-77;  Vol.  26,  pp.  511- 
18,  787;  Vol.  34,  pp.  578-88. 

Outlook.  Vol.  45,  pp.  439-42;  Vol.  73,  pp.  721-23;  Vol.  84,  pp.  1043- 
4,  1034;  Vol.  86,  pp.  811-6,  842-3;  Vol  88,  pp.  314-17;  Vol.  98,  pp.  448- 
53;  Vol.  102,  pp.  159-60;  Vol.  103,  pp.  705-7,  52-4;  Vol.  104,  pp.  501-2; 
Vol.  105,  pp.  516,  780,  821,  824. 

The  Public.  Vol.  16,  p.  1040;  May,  1913,  p.  509;  August,  1913,  pp. 
798-9;  September,  1913,  pp.  869-70. 

American  Journal  of  Sociology.  Vol.  17,  pp.  303-14;  Vol.  19,  pp. 
130-134. 

Cassiers.    Vol.  41,  p.  533;  Vol.  25,  pp.  227-30. 

Nineteenth  Century  and  After.  Vol.  63,  p.  289;  Vol.  64,  pp.  507- 
24,  748-62,  763-76;  Vol.  72,  pp.  264-76;  Vol.  73,  pp.  644-58;  Vol.  74,  pp. 
1167-84;  Vol.  84,  p.  311. 

Twentieth  Century.     Vol.  6,  pp.  65-69. 

Everybody's  Magazine.     Vol.  27,  pp.  271-72. 

Christian  Advocate.    August  28,  1913. 

Nation.     Vol.  96,  pp.  350-1,  274,  248;  Vol.  97,  pp.  94-5. 

Century  Magazine.  Vol.  63,  p.  285;  Vol.  64,  p.  748;  Vol.  72,  pp. 
264-76;  Vol.  84,  pp.  311-13. 

Catholic  World.     Vol.  96,  pp.  577-86. 

American  Economic  Review.  Vol.  1,  pp.  20-21-37;  Vol.  3,  pp. 
259-86. 


Atlantic  Monthly.  Vol.  67,  pp.  34-44;  Vol.  110,  p.  411;  Vol.  112,  pp. 
289-97,  431-3,  289,  444-53;  October,  1913. 

Fortnightly  Review.     Vol.  94,  p.  1145;  Vol.  98,  pp.  585-98. 

Independence.  Vol.  52,  pp.  2330-32;  Vol.  54,  pp.  2373-5;  Vol.  59, 
pp.  324-8;  Vol.  61,  p.  1251;  Vol.  67,  p.  1497;  Vol.  70,  pp.  806-7;  Vol.  72, 
pp.  584-5;  Vol.  73,  p.  1007;  Vol.  74,  p.  851;  Vol.  75,  p.  459;  Vol.  76,  pp. 
536,  209,  332. 

Living  Age.  Vol.  273,  pp.  451-61,  370-72,  248-50;  Vol.  277,  pp. 
195-205. 

Hearst  Magazine.    Vol.  23,  pp.  499-502. 

English  Historical  Review.     Vol.  15,  pp.  445-55. 

Contempory  Review.  Vol.  93,  pp.  308-25;  Vol.  95,  pp.  227-38,  548- 
65;  Vol.  96,  pp.  67-89;  Vol.  102,  pp.  193-201. 

Arena.     Vol.  23,  pp.  499-515. 

Westminister  Review.     Vol.  165,  pp.  135-47;   Vol.  172,  pp.  623-31. 

Ghaut.  Vol.  17,  p.  471;  Vol.  55,  pp.  13-14,  1304;  Vol.  60,  pp.  337- 
55,  414;  Vol.  66,  pp.  148-50;  Vol,  68,  pp.  134-38,  12-14;  Vol,  70,  p.  7-8; 
Vol.  72,  p.  37. 

Colliers.     Vol.  48,  pp.  16-17. 

Yale  Review.    Vol.  19,  pp.  32-54. 

Annals  of  Amer.  Acad.  of  Pol.  and  Soc.  Science.  Vol.  17,  pp.  136- 
38;  Vol.  33,  pp.  440-316-25;  Vol.  36,  p.  397;  Vol.  37,  pp.  1-90,  203-11; 
Vol.  48,  pp.  45-53,  66-77,  3-12,  22-36,  13-21,  37-40. 

Forum.     Vol.  28,  pp.  542-53;   Vol.  42,  p.  535;  Vol.  49,  pp.  576-84. 

New  York  Times  Annalist.  November  17,  1913,  p.  615;  Novem- 
ber 24,  1913,  p.  668;  December,  1913,  pp.  808,  825. 

Ladies  Home  Journal.     Vol.  30,  p.  27. 

Harper's  Weekly.    Vol.  51,  p.  1537. 

New  South  Wales  Industrial  Gazette.  July,  1913,  p.  1015;  Septem- 
ber, 1913,  p.  3;  November,  1913,  pp.  43,  435. 


—36— 


OVERDUE. 

o\93l 


LD  21-100w-8,'34 


GEMERAL 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


